MGMT501 research methods paper on Qualitative research. 450-600 words- APA format

The focus of the paper is on motivation.

 

Article chosen: (I attached it as well)

Assessing Individual-level Factors Supporting Student Intrinsic Motivation in Online Discussions: A Qualitative Study.

Shroff, Ronnie H; Vogel, Douglas R; Coombes, John. Journal of Information Systems Education19. 1 (Spring 2008): 111-126. 

 

Write a short paper (450-600 words) that demonstrates a brief analysis of the qualitative research article you selected. You are to write your paper in such a way as to answer the questions/issues below. However, do not include the list on your paper. Instead, let the items guide the content expressed in your paper, which should be in typical paragraph form.

·     

State the research problem or issue in the study.

·      State the hypothesis/questions or objectives. Were they stated clearly?

·      What questionnaires/survey instruments were used to answer the problem?

·      What was the population used in the study? Was there a sample used? If so, how was the sample selected? How many were in the sample?

·      What were the statistical techniques used to analyze the data?

·      Identify and report/discuss model or models that are associated with the study or are developed from the study.

  

The paper must be written in APA format with a title page, abstract and reference page. 

   

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Report Information from ProQuest
January 21 2013 12:31
_______________________________________________________________

Table of Contents

1. Assessing Individual-level Factors Supporting Student Intrinsic Motivation in Online Discussions: A
Qualitative Study……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1

21 January 2013 ii ProQuest

Document 1 of 1

Assessing Individual-level Factors Supporting Student Intrinsic Motivation in Online Discussions: A
Qualitative Study
Author: Shroff, Ronnie H; Vogel, Douglas R; Coombes, John
Publication info: Journal of Information Systems Education 19. 1 (Spring 2008): 111-126.
ProQuest document link
Abstract: Research has established that intrinsic motivation has a positive effect on learning and academic
achievement. However, little is known about the impact of different technology-supported learning activities on
student intrinsic motivation or whether such learning activities significantly enhance student intrinsic motivation
compared to traditional classroom environments without technological support. In order to investigate the
phenomenon of intrinsic motivation in technology-supported learning environments, this paper examines factors
that support individual student intrinsic motivation in online discussions. A research model is presented based
on research into motivation, and the specific areas of self-determination and curiosity provide a framework for
the model. A qualitative research methodology is used to validate the model. Results from the study indicate
that five factors; perceived competence, perceived challenge, feedback, perceived interest and perceived
curiosity, were strongly supported, with partial support for the construct of perceived choice. [PUBLICATION
ABSTRACT]
Links: Base URL to Journal Linker:
Full Text: Headnote ABSTRACT Research has established that intrinsic motivation has a positive effect on
learning and academic achievement. However, little is known about the impact of different technology-
supported learning activities on student intrinsic motivation or whether such learning activities significantly
enhance student intrinsic motivation compared to traditional classroom environments without technological
support. In order to investigate the phenomenon of intrinsic motivation in technology-supported learning
environments, this paper examines factors that support individual student intrinsic motivation in online
discussions. A research model is presented based on research into motivation, and the specific areas of self-
determination and curiosity provide a framework for the model. A qualitative research methodology is used to
validate the model. Results from the study indicate that five factors; perceived competence, perceived
challenge, feedback, perceived interest and perceived curiosity, were strongly supported, with partial support for
the construct of perceived choice. Keywords: Intrinsic motivation, Self-determination, On-line Discussion, E-
learning 1. INTRODUCTION Today’s learning environments have the technological means to open learning to
the world and support interaction styles that are fundamentally different from those of a traditional classroom
environment and no longer need to conform to the traditional classroom environment (Gulikers, Bastiaens,
&Martens, 2005). Instead, using online or collaborative technology means that learners can participate actively
in their own knowledge acquisition and development process which may “accelerate the pace of learning and
create unlimited opportunities for collaboration, insight and knowledge production” (J. M. Keller &Suzuki, 2004).
Where previously only face-to-face interaction was possible, technology can be used to “transform” space and
time and enables students to communicate, coordinate and collaborate their activities at any time without the
need for face-to-face contact (Alavi, Wheeler, &Valacich, 1995). Little is known about the impact of different
technology-supported learning activities on student intrinsic motivation (Martens, Gulikers, &Bastiaens, 2004).
In a prior related exploratory study, we examined the implications of various other learning activities on aspects
of intrinsic motivation in e-learning (Shroff, Vogel, Coombes, &Lee, 2007). The results indicated that each
learning activity carried with it support for some constructs and less for others. For example, video lectures
fostered control in terms of an individual’s ability to choose segments and duration but did not for providing

21 January 2013 Page 1 of 17 ProQuest

http://search.proquest.com/docview/200115872?accountid=8289

http://yw6vq3kb9d.search.serialssolutions.com?genre=article&sid=ProQ:&atitle=Assessing%20Individual-level%20Factors%20Supporting%20Student%20Intrinsic%20Motivation%20in%20Online%20Discussions:%20A%20Qualitative%20Study&title=Journal%20of%20Information%20Systems%20Education&issn=10553096&date=2008-04-01&volume=19&issue=1&spage=111&author=Shroff,%20Ronnie%20H;Vogel,%20Douglas%20R;Coombes,%20John

challenges in terms of providing learner stimulation. On the other hand, most individuals found attending online
discussions more intriguing, given the rich nature of the discussions, and the more personal interactions with
each other and the teacher (Shroff et al., 2007). Based on intrinsic motivational theories, this study may
contribute to the future development of a framework explaining the potential role of intrinsic motivation and
willingness to participate in e-learning environments. A stronger theoretical basis would prove enormously
beneficial since it would have the potential to provide a framework for guiding future research by identifying key
research variables and relationships. It is believed that intrinsic motivation theory may provide important clues
as to how e-learning technologies can become powerful catalysts for change as well as tools for redesigning our
learning and instructional systems (Martens et al, 2004; Teo, Chang, &Gay, 2006). The research question for
this study is “What individual-level factors support intrinsic motivation in online discussions?” The preparatory
step toward achieving these objectives was to conduct a review of literature on intrinsic motivation. Since the
focus of this study is to assess the individual-level Factors supporting student intrinsic motivation in online
discussions effects of online and faceto-face discussions on factors supporting individual student intrinsic
motivation, Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is used to identify the key individual-level factors supporting
intrinsic motivation. In addition to its theoretical contribution, (i.e. the development of a research model for
assessing the effects of online discussions on factors supporting individual student intrinsic motivation) this
research presents important practical contributions through the identification of important factors that support
students’ intrinsic motivation in technology-supported learning environments. For the purpose of this study,
intrinsic motivation is defined as an individual’s ability to demonstrate competence (E. Deci, Eghrari, Patrick,
&Leone, 1994), a readiness to engage in an activity because of his or her own internal interests and curiosity
(Lepper, Henderlong, &Gingras, 2000) and a desire to master the environment (Brophy, 1983). A better
understanding of the nature of intrinsic motivation and the ability to gauge students’ intrinsic motivation while
interacting with technology-supported learning environments promises to contribute to the design of more
effective educational programs and thus ultimately to higher educational performance. 2. LITERATURE
REVIEW Considerable discussions emanating from academic debate and research surround the emergence of
new online environments. Central to such discussions are a variety of topics relevant as background to the
purpose and problem statement presented in this research project. Specifically, this study’s literature review
integrates and synthesizes content regarding (a) technology-enabled learning environments and (b) intrinsic
motivation. The following sections discuss some of the major work done in each of the above areas with special
consideration for the relevance of these issues to the present study. This review represents the basis for the
development of a theoretical framework of the present study. The increasing numbers of university courses that
apply computer technologies have created a need to understand how these technologies impact student
learning. However, a major problem is that we presently lack information as to how to effectively make use of
technology-supported learning environments in order to promote active learning, collaboration and problem
solving skills of individual students. It is not only difficult to assess how students learn but also how well they
adapt to these technology-supported learning environments. Consequently, what the use of computer
technology has brought about is a complete reconfiguration of today’s learning process which is to date only
partly understood. Technology-supported learning environments are considered especially critical to the
effectiveness of student learning and performance because these learning environments provide students with
more opportunities to interact with instructors and peers than traditional face-toface learning environments
(Gulikers et al., 2005; Martens et al., 2004; Vogel &Klassen, 2001). Therefore, it is necessary to explain the use
of technology and its potential to change the nature of learning environments and the way in which activities are
designed to support intellectual development. Using technology could cultivate cognitive growth thus promoting
motivation. The advent of technology has provided a new avenue for instructional delivery. Many new
technologies are interactive (Greenfield &Cocking, 1996), and thus, it is now relatively easier to form
environments in which students can learn by doing, receiving feedback and continually refining their

21 January 2013 Page 2 of 17 ProQuest

understanding to build on existing knowledge (Scardamalia &Bereiter, 1994). The utilization of technology has
redesigned the way today’s courses can be delivered to students with the result that time and space no longer
constrain instructors and students. Technology can provide students flexibility with respect to how, when and
where learning can occur. With technology, individuals can meet either synchronously using chat rooms, or
asynchronously using threaded discussion boards, in which members contribute to the group discussion at
times convenient to their schedules over a defined time period (Beaudin, 1999). The interactive and
collaborative features of asynchronous technology permit students to impart opinions, viewpoints and
experiences, to form relationships, to seek out assistance (Chong, 1998), to impart and disseminate information
that can impact intercultural ways of thinking and behaving (Muller-Hartmann, 2000) and to support and provide
confidence to each other (Sengupta, 2001). Discussions and interaction are thereby increased in the learning
process. Consequently, a growing demand for learning at any time and at any place has fueled a collaborative
learning environment. Interactivity of this kind within the technology environment is an important feature for
learning and effective for creating contexts that students can explore and reexamine collaboratively.
Technology provides essential tools with which to accomplish the goals of supporting a collaborative and
constructivist learning environment. Many universities are starting to use various computer course tools or
platforms to promote online learning. These platforms, such as “Blackboard(TM)” or “WebCT(TM),” can be used
to design either Web-based or Web-assisted courses. For example, electronic discussion boards and chat
rooms in Web-based classes have been found to enhance communication and dialogue through use of these
tools. Telecommunications tools such as electronic discussion boards provide a means for textual dialogue,
discussion and debate – interactivity that leads to the social construction of meaning. Electronic class
discussions have distinct advantages. Firstly, they extend class time by providing for the exchange of ideas
outside the class setting. secondly, not being time or place dependent, additional work outside the class is
possible for students who are not in close proximity or who have schedule or time constraints. Thirdly, online
discussions can be archived easily so that the instructor has a record of the discussion, time spent participating
in it and the thought processes involved in the ways in which students think. Lastly, online discussions enable
timely feedback by the instructor or by peer learners and they can create a social environment that helps
motivate the learners and establish a forum within which concepts, ideas, beliefs and views can be tested and
applied. The challenge of education is to apply technologies for learning and to draw from the knowledge of
human behavior and cognition, as well as from practical applications of how technology can support
collaborative and constructivist learning environments (Hiltz, 1990; Jonassen, Peck, &Wilson, 1999). In addition,
students may be motivated to learn due to the meaningful nature of these learning environments and activities.
Despite the importance of motivation in education, intrinsic motivation has been studied primarily within the field
of psychology. Only recently, scholars in education and psychology have started working together in an attempt
to discover the underlying constructs of intrinsic motivation (Schunk, 2000). When students use technology as a
tool or a support for communicating with others, they are in an active role, rather than the passive role of
recipient of information transmitted by an instructor. The students are actively making choices about how to
generate, obtain, manipulate or display information. Technology use allows them to actively think about
information, make choices and execute skills compared to typical face-to-face classroom environments (Bordia,
1997). Moreover, when technology is used as a tool to support students in performing authentic tasks, the
students are in a position to define their goals, make decisions and evaluate their progress (Leidner
&Jarvenpaa, 1995). Motivation research has addressed how classrooms are structured to promote intrinsic
motivation and the methods for assessing student motivation. As such, classroom activities that support intrinsic
motivation are thought to enhance feelings of competence and control one’s learning (Howles, 2005; McCombs,
1991). Reviews of motivation in education (R. M. Ryan &D. L. Deci, 2000), recognize the importance of intrinsic
motivation and have emphasized the role of intrinsic motivational processes in individual learning and
achievement. Growing evidence in educational literature strongly suggests that such issues have significant

21 January 2013 Page 3 of 17 ProQuest

implications that extend well beyond learning and achievement. Consequently, motivational strategies need to
be assessed for their impact in the broader and more significant areas of individual development (Hodges,
2004; Vansteenkiste, Simons, Lens, Sheldon, &Deci, 2004). The central postulation of Self-Determination
Theory is that individuals have a psychological need to feel competent, self-determined and related (E. L. Deci
&Vansteenkiste, 2004; Ryan &Deci, 2002). Addressing these needs of competence, self-determination and
relatedness promotes optimal motivation for a behavior. The three aspects of a motivational Iy supportive
environment that correspond to these three psychological needs are structure, autonomy support and
involvement respectively. The structural dimension refers to the degree to which an individual is competent in
an activity (i.e. able to understand the activity, with clear expectations from the same), finds the tasks within the
activity challenging and where positive feedback is provided during the activity. In autonomy supporting contexts
choices are given, pressure to engage in the behavior is minimized and individuals are encouraged to initiate
actions by themselves. Involvement, finally, is characterized by interest in a particular social context (Ryan,
1994). Self-Determination Theory (E. Deci &Ryan, 1985; E. L. Deci &Vansteenkiste, 2004; R. M. Ryan &E. L.
Deci, 2000) assumes that an individual has inherent propensities to be intrinsically motivated, to assimilate his
or her social worlds and to integrate external regulations into self-regulations (Brown &Ryan, 2004). Specific to
Self-Determination Theory, is the proposition that these integrative tendencies operate in conjunction with the
three basic psychological needs for competence, self-determination and relatedness (see Figure 1). Self-
Determination Theory suggests that social environmental settings can facilitate or hinder intrinsic motivation by
thwarting an individual’s innate psychological needs (E. L. Deci &Vansteenkiste, 2004). An individual’s
perception of competence is an important factor supporting intrinsic motivation (Vallerand &Reid, 1984).
Therefore, an individual who does not feel he or she will perform successfully or do not feel a sense of
competence will more likely be extrinsically motivated or not motivated at all to participate in the task or activity
(White, 1959). In addition to the technical skills associated with using the hardware and software, an individual
may feel competent by utilizing his or her cognitive skills to successfully interact online versus face-to-face
discussions which are significantly different. Thus, online discussions facilitate individual technical, cognitive
and communication skills that create an individual learner who feels competent to achieve in the technology-
supported learning environment. Therefore, perceived competence refers to perceived capacities that an
individual has, thus leading to success in his or her tasks and activities. Communication resources such as the
“Blackboard(TM) Virtual Classroom” may increase individual web etiquette, the skill of active listening, using
concise communication, analyzing, synthesizing and evaluating information from multiple sources. Deci and
Ryan’s Self-Determination Theory provides a solid framework for understanding the construct of individual
perceived challenge. An individual is challenged when he or she perceives the challenge(s) of the activity to be
balanced with his or her abilities to perform the task(s) (Reeve &Deci, 1996). According to Self-Determination
Theory, being challenged is imperative to facilitating intrinsic motivation (E. Deci &Ryan, 1985). Self-
Determination Theory (SDT) (E. Deci &Ryan, 1985; E. Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, &Ryan, 1991; R. M. Ryan &E.
L. Deci, 2000) presupposes individuals to be actively seeking optimal challenges, so task difficulty in a given
activity relies entirely on the perception of the individual who participated in the activity. Online discussions may
provide challenge because they facilitate individual learner stimulation and facilitate communication through
interaction and collaboration ensuring that they benefit from participation by engaging in a rich dialogue that
taps into processes of analysis, application, synthesis and evaluation. Research on feedback has also
demonstrated that the inclusion of feedback facilitates individual intrinsic motivation (Pittman, Davey, Alafat,
Wetherill, &Kramer, 1980; Zinser, Young, &King, 1982), and it was demonstrated that the provision of positive
feedback resulted in intrinsically motivated behavior over the provision of negative feedback (Zinser et al.,
1982). For example, receiving positive feedback in the form of verbal praise can increase the intrinsic
satisfaction derived from that activity, which can perpetuate a positive learning atmosphere and therefore raise
quality. Technology-supported electronic discussions can be used to demonstrate this distinction between

21 January 2013 Page 4 of 17 ProQuest

behavioral and cognitive conceptions of learning. For example, the use of the “Blackboard(TM) Virtual
Classroom” may engage the individual learner through the use of positive reinforcement (e.g., “correct,” ‘Very
good,” etc) that may encourage his or her continued interaction and facilitate an understanding of the content of
the task. Hence, the use of electronic discussions may provide opportunities for positive feedback because
discussions on a designated topic or issue, for example, may lead to individual reflection on the subject and
thereby, sharing of knowledge. Hence, this delivery of different dialogues, interaction patterns and knowledge
sharing, contributes to greater expectations for peer commenting positive feedback, elaboration on and
justification of responses. Self-Determination Theory has integrated the construct of perceived choice (E. Deci,
1975). Self-Determination Theory states that choice has a positive impact on cognitive and affective
engagement because it increases intrinsic motivation (E. Deci et al., 1991; E. L. Deci &Ryan, 1987, 1992;
Walker, Greene, &Mansell, 2006). In the case of online discussions, if an individual believes that he or she is
engaged in the activity because he or she chose to be involved, that individual is more likely to continue to value
it. Online discussions may increase individual perceptions of choice because the interactive online nature of the
discussions increases individual volition, that is, it provides a sense of unpressured willingness to engage in the
activity. For example, if an individual believes that he or she is engaged in online discussions, because he or
she chose to be involved, that individual is more likely to continue to value it. Online discussions may increase
an individual’s perception of choice, because the interactive nature of online discussions, gives an individual
choices in terms of how much he or she can participate in the topic of discussion or the choice of which
discussions to engage in. As such, volition is high when actions are endorsed fully by the individual such that
the individual experiences high freedom (E. Deci &Ryan, 1980; Reeve &Deci, 1996) and little or no pressure to
engage in the activity (E. L. Deci &Ryan, 1987). Interest is considered a powerful motivator (E. L. Deci &Ryan,
1992) and online discussions may increase individual perceived interest because the task of engaging in an
electronic discussion is novel and may lure the participant into action (i.e. entice or intrigue them). Thus, online
discussions may increase situational interest, because the richness of the interactive discussions through text or
the sharing of topics or ideas may elicit behavior that is intriguing or enticing to an individual. The construct of
interest that falls under the involvement dimension and corresponds with the need for relatedness, may not
adequately account for other phenomena that should ·be addressed in the context of technology-supported
learning environments. We believe that the construct of curiosity can reasonably be integrated within the
conceptual framework presented in Figure 1 above. Curiosity as an educationally relevant motivational concept
is used as a basis for educational theories (D. E. Berlyne, 1978; Kashdan &Fincham, 2004) and thus can also
be used in existing motivational theories such as Self-Determination Theory. If curiosity is to be stimulated, the
role of the environment is to provide an individual with activities/opportunities to explore. Thus, online
discussions can stimulate curiosity because the different dialogues and interaction patterns within the online
discussions are conducive to facilitating effective communication and learner stimulation. The constructs of
interest and curiosity are related to the extent that they address complementary aspects of the need for
relatedness. However, both constructs have a narrow and specialized meaning and prior research has
operationalized them as separate constructs from one another (H. Keller, Schneider, &Henderson, 1994;
Schiefele, 1991). 3. RESEARCH APPROACH Based on literature on intrinsic motivation, a case study protocol
was designed. The case study protocol was developed from a combined literature review of this paper and
research question and then supplemented by the framework developed. By applying a theoretical interpretive
model to the findings, the findings were mapped to their respective constructs. Individual student reflections
served as an important element of the assessment process, since they penetrated deeper into the dynamic
issues surrounding the interaction processes in the online discussions compared to quantitative assessments
(Yin, 1994). This study is limited to online discussions, because, as our prior research suggests, these
discussions have the potential to influence a wide spectrum of factors directly related to intrinsic motivation and
thus appear as a favorable context to study the subject. Students from the Bachelor of Business Administration

21 January 2013 Page 5 of 17 ProQuest

(BBA) program taking the FB2501 “Management of Information Systems (MIS2)” course, constituted the pool of
available interviewees. The selection of this course was based on the following criteria. Firstly, this course
provided a rich opportunity for applying technology support in online classroom environments. secondly,
learning activities in the form of discussions were structured into the design and organization of the course.
Thirdly, these online discussions were utilized for the purpose of understanding what individual-level factors
support intrinsic motivation in online discussions. The “Blackboard(TM)” course management system was
chosen to supplement this study for two reasons. Firstly, the software is an existing available resource acquired
by the Faculty of Business at the City University of Hong Kong. The Faculty of Business has taken on the
responsibility of this software management, staff in-service training and administration of “Blackboard(TM).” The
reasons for choosing “Blackboard(TM) also extend beyond the availability and convenience of the software.
This software provides various pre-built course management solutions as well as the addition of an Internet-
based component to the course. The software also provides a structure of customizable tools. Using these tools
is easier than programming a website on the Internet, which requires web page programming knowledge. In
addition, “Blackboard(TM) provides passwordprotected access using a standard web browser (i.e. “Internet
Explorer(TM)” or “Netscape Communicator(TM)”), which offers security for protecting student information.
Online discussion boards through “Blackboard(TM) Virtual Classroom promote reflection and analysis, thus
enabling discussions among all student participants. Knowing that their comments will be available at all time to
the instructor, students should typically take more time to consider, write and edit their thoughts, as well as
support them using quotes, hyperlinks and attachments. In addition, the online discussions help students learn
to appreciate and evaluate positions that others express. This gives them the opportunity to be challenged,
corrected and questioned by their peers, thereby inviting students into a community of practice that motivates
them to learn the subject matter and helps them to gain social skills. Once the overall course structure had been
determined, learning activities were designed for online discussions. For example, online discussions using the
“Blackboard(TM) Virtual Classroom” were structured around the case method to engage students in more
expert-like ways of thinking, acting and problem solving (i.e. searching for learning resources, making
interpretations, engaging in negotiations, providing rationales and reaching conclusions) (Collins, 1990). For
example, students, working in groups of four, were told to examine one of the processes of the Information
Systems Development Process. Each group of students was required to examine one the processes and
present to the class the pros and cons in the form of a “PowerPoint(TM)” presentation. The purpose of this
activity was to allow students an opportunity to share their knowledge, to constructively critique each other’s
work and discuss improvements and new insights. Table 1 presents a sample activity which was organized
around the online discussions within the “Blackboard(TM) Virtual Classroom” discussions. Respondents were
selected using a two-stage sampling procedure. In the first stage, the FB2501 “Management of Information
Systems (MIS2)” course was selected and in the second stage individuals were chosen from the FB2501
course. Seven students who were exposed to the online and face-to-face discussions were interviewed from the
course. The selection of this course was based on the following criteria: Firstly, this course provided a rich
opportunity for applying both technology and non-technology support to both online and face-to-face classroom
environments. secondly, learning activities in the form of online and face-to-face discussions were structured
into the design and organization of the course. We expected students to engage in “expert-like” ways of
thinking, acting and problem solving (i.e. making interpretations, engaging in negotiations, providing rationales
and reaching conclusions) in the online discussions. Interviews for the “Management of Information Systems I”
took place during the first half of semester B (Cohort 2003). The interview protocol minimized bias by providing
a basis for a consistent sequence and approach to interviews (Appendix 1), by adopting consistent wording for
the applicable questions and by asking each question in the same way to each participant to minimize bias.
Interviewing a student sample from the BBA program, helped to ascertain generalizability of this study across
populations, and helped to cross-check data and served, “As a strategy that added rigour, breadth and depth to

21 January 2013 Page 6 of 17 ProQuest

[the] investigation” (Denzin &Lincoln, 1994). For this study, we interviewed a total of seven students enrolled in
the BBA program. A small sample size of seven students was large enough to insure a rich and complete set of
responses and justified given the preliminary nature of the investigation (Tesch, 1990; Yin, 1994). The
procedure used for conducting the interviews was as follows: Participants were scheduled for a 60-minute
individual session in a private room. The description of the research was read, which allowed for the participant
to ask any questions to clarify the nature of the study and his or her expectations for participation. Following the
project description, participants were asked a series of open-ended questions in a semi-structured format from
the interview guide, skipping any context irrelevant questions. Participants were encouraged to describe
situations in significant detail and were asked follow-up questions to draw emerging meanings (Rubin &Rubin,
1995). 4. CASE STUDY MEASURES The research question in focus is – what individual-level factors support
intrinsic motivation in online discussions?” The spécifie type of learning activity is online discussions using the
“Virtual Classroom” tool of the “Blackboard(TM)” online learning platform. We believe that the interactive nature
of these discussions may support intrinsically motivated behavior of an individual, compared to other
technology-supported learning activities. The “Virtual Classroom” is increasingly becoming a much wider used
platform on which to teach a broad range of different topics and gives an opportunity for participants to engage
in collaborative discussions. A semi-structured interview outline was developed to study the impact of the online
discussions on the six constructs (perceived competence, perceived challenge, feedback, perceived choice,
perceived interest and perceived curiosity) chosen from the literature and research model previously described.
Measures were developed for each of the following constructs covered in the interviews: 1. Degree of Individual
Perceived Competence of Online Discussions: Questions relating to individual perceived competence were
asked, such as the extent to which the online discussions promoted individual ability to evaluate, use and
communicate information effectively and enabled him or her to see different perspectives and thereby, construct
knowledge more effectively. The following three measures are factors supporting the degree of perceived
competence in the online discussions. Perceived competence was measured by the extent to which these
factors were present or not present in the assigned activity. Perceived competence was measured by the extent
to which these factors were present or not present in the assigned activity. Capability The potential ability of an
individual that enables him or her to execute courses of action required to attain designated types of
performances. Control The belief in one’s own capacity to achieve and perform may cause that individual to
experience a sense of control. Skill The ability to perform a task or activity consistently over a period of time and
the expertise required for a particular activity that may include manual dexterity and/or mental aptitude. 2.
Degree of Individual Perceived Challenge of Online Discussions: Questions relating to individual perceived
challenge were asked, such as the extent to which the online discussions raised levels of difficulties and
whether the structure of the activities provided “conquerable” challenges or not. The following three measures
are factors supporting the degree of challenge in the online discussions. Perceived challenge was measured by
the extent to which these factors were present or not present in the assigned activity. Difficulty The level of
resistance to successful performance. Problem A question raised for inquiry, consideration or solution or a
situation that requires further investigation. Obstacle Any factor or a combination of factors that interferes or
hinders an individual’s development, delays his or her progress and impedes fulfillment of a goal. 3. Degree of
Feedback of Online Discussions: Questions relating to feedback were asked, such as the extent to which the
online discussions promoted and generated positive feedback (i.e. verbal praise) between individuals. The
following three measures are factors supporting the degree of feedback in the online discussions. Feedback
was measured by the extent to which these factors were present or not present in the assigned activity.
Compliment A remark or act expressing praise or approval. Opinion A personal belief judgment or appraisal
formed in the mind about a particular matter. Comment The information provided by any individual involved in
the evaluation process. 4. Degree of Individual Perceived Choice of Online Discussions: Questions relating to
individual perceived choice were asked, such as the extent to which the online discussions provided an

21 January 2013 Page 7 of 17 ProQuest

individual with choices in terms of the level of participation and contribution and the option to share information.
The following three measures are factors supporting the degree of perceived choice in the online discussions.
Perceived choice was measured by the extent to which these factors were present or not present in the
assigned activity. Alternative Providing or expressing a choice. Preference The extent to which an individual
brings forward for consideration or gives favorable priority or opportunity for choosing. Selection The opportunity
or privilege of an individual to choose freely, which may require an exercise of judgment in his or her respective
tasks or activities. 5. Degree of Individual Perceived Interest of Online Discussions: Questions relating to
individual perceived interest were asked, such as the extent to which the online discussions evoked pleasure,
appealed to or stimulated the faculties of an individual and lured him or her to the respective activity. The
following three measures are factors supporting the degree of perceived interest in the online discussions.
Interest was measured by the extent to which these factors were present or not present in the assigned activity.
Stimulation Tasks or activities that are demanding to the extent that they engage the attention or arousal of an
individual. Appeal The degree of influence an individual has in evoking satisfaction and stressing the appeal of
the tasks or activities. Enjoyment The extent to which an activity is perceived to be pleasurable in its own right.
5. Degree of Individual Perceived Curiosity of Online Discussions: – Questions relating to individual perceived
curiosity were asked, such as the extent to which the online discussions promoted the ability of an individual to
investigate, study or analyze – look into or explore, etc. The following three measures are factors supporting the
degree of perceived curiosity in the online discussions. Perceived curiosity was measured by the extent to
which these factors were present or not present in the assigned activity. Discover Get to know or become aware
of or make a new finding. Explore The potential ability of an individual to investigate and explore the relationship
between the tasks and his or learning abilities. Query A request for information or posing a question in an
attempt to search for information. The interview questions were generated using the constructs in the literature
review and research model. These constructs are highlighted in the work on Self-Determination Theory by Deci
and Ryan (1985) and related work on curiosity by Berlyne (1954) and others (Dember &Earl, 1957; H. Keller et
al., 1994). Individual students with acceptable English skills were selected to be interviewed from the FB2501
course. The objective was to interview them with a motive to explore the influence of the online discussions
relative to each intrinsic motivation construct. Semi-structured interviews were used with leading open-ended
questions, so that participants were able to reflect on the meaning of their experiences during the interviews and
thus engage themselves in a deeper exploration of the ascribed meaning of their motivational behaviors. 5.
DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES In our data analysis, information was represented in the form of matrices that
displayed information (tabular information showing relationships among categories of information) in a spatial
format, thereby presenting that information systematically to the reader (Miles &Huberman, 1984) and enabling
the identification of the coding procedures to be used in order to reduce information to themes/categories
(Tesch, 1990). The stages of the coding process are shown in Figure 2. Coding was guided by a coding
scheme that was derived from constructs and ideas found in the relevant literature (a so-called start-list of
codes). Data refinement included selecting and thus simplifying the data that appeared in the transcriptions. The
objective was to code the categories and group and organize these categories, so that conclusions could be
reasonably drawn and verified. Data were displayed in matrices and charts (see Table 2 for example), thereby
illustrating the patterns and findings from the data. Analysis and coding of the data transcript, presented in
matrices and displays, were used to visualize and represent the data, thus enabling further discovery of patterns
in the issues raised by the participants 6. RESULTS The results are summarized in Table 3, aligned with the
embedded units design with “+” and “-,” indicating positive and negative comments, respectively based on the
coding scheme illustrated in Table 2. For example, “+CH” under Interviewee 1, indicates a positively related
comment with respect to the “perceived challenge (CH)” construct. Similarly, “-CM” under Interviewee 4,
indicates that this student made a negative comment with respect to the “perceived competence (CM)”
construct, with regard to the online discussions. If we examine the issues from the six primary constructs

21 January 2013 Page 8 of 17 ProQuest

previously discussed, we find that: Perceived Competence (CM) was especially recognized in our online
discussions. We interpreted from the following statements that perceptions of individual competence were
higher in online discussions, as compared to face-to-face discussions. “…I chat online using ICQ or
something…so I think I’m very competent. ” “I feel it is easy to control [the Virtual Classroom discussion}
because it’s just like the way we do our online chatting. ” “…because our generation are used to chatting online,
so it is familiar with us to use such software to chat with others. So, I think I am very skillful in the online
discussions. ” Control, which is one aspect of competence, was especially recognized in the online discussions.
It was a compelling indicator, given the ability of an individual student’s own capacity to achieve and perform,
which may cause him or her to experience a sense of control. There were also numerous positive comments
about skill, which is another significant measure of individual perceived competence. Perceived Challenge (CH)
was positively supported by all seven interviewees and recognized in the online discussions with regard to
difficulty, problems and obstacles. We interpreted from the following statements that perceptions of individual
challenge were higher in online discussions, as compared to face-to-face discussions. “Yeah…actually when we
are talking about something we try to explain and use some examples, but when we do online discussion, we
can only give some abstract concepts…we cannot say a long story to say what I’ve just mentioned about this
point…and this part is the most challenging. ” “…it may be difficult because if one types one sentence and the
other types one sentence, then the previous sentence will go up. Sometimes a sentence comes up and others
may not understand what this sentence relates to. ” Feedback (FE) was positively supported by all seven
interviewees and recognized as being important in the online discussions with regard to compliments, opinions
and comments generated by students. We interpreted from the following statements that online discussions led
to higher positive feedback, as compared to face-to-face discussions. “/ think their feedback is of very high
quality because to my concern 1 feel their points are considered carefully before they have typed them in and
entered actually onto the board. It was just like some chatting and of course the compliments are very useful to
encourage you. Their feedbacks may be useful and when we are discussing about some controversy problem,
may be our points are more or less the same or we may have different opinions about one question, so may be
their feedback at that time is useful. ” “…whenever I say something my team member will say, “I cannot agree
with you more, I totally agree with you or I have different opinions. ” This will stimulate my thinking because of
the good feedback. ” “…we can give our very positive and constructive opinions about something and we don’t
need to care about others’ opinions.” “Yes, because it [online discussions] made me think more critically and
more actively because I needed to give my own opinion. ” Perceived Choice (CO) was positively supported by
four of the seven interviewees. The measures of alternative, preference and selection were factors supporting
individual student intrinsic motivation in the online discussions. Perceptions of freedom to choose from
alternative methods of participation seemed to be higher in online discussions, as compared to face-to-face
discussions: “…sometimes may be I have my own ideas about the questions or I will type a lot or may be
sometimes may be I’m confused…! have no idea about it…so I just sit there and watch what the others say and
form my own opinions later on. So I can have that choice. ” “I can choose when to discuss – depends on myself
and what to discuss depends on may be the topic the teacher has offered. ” “Choice…hmm… because we have
more people I think the choices…we had more choices of course. ” “Mostly it was all up to me I think. ”
However, three of the interviewees disagreed they had much choice when engaged in the online discussions
and noted that: “I think there aren’t many choices for me because the topic is assigned to us and the only way is
to type. ” “Actually, if the online discussions could be open to us at any time, then I think it’s more convenient,
but according to our course we can only choose the time as defined in the tutorial and topics are also assigned.”
“I don’t think there was a lot of choice because we had to participate in the online discussions and the time was
very limited. ” Perceived Interest (IN) was positively supported by all seven interviewees. We interpreted from
the following statements that perceptions of individual perceived interest were higher in online discussions, as
compared to face-toface discussions. Here the students also sought engagement in the activity because using

21 January 2013 Page 9 of 17 ProQuest

the computer technology was both interesting and enjoyable. Yet, they also recognized that being interested
precipitated their learning process: “…it’s very interesting and I think it’s a good way for me… it is so efficient for
me. It’s more efficient I think, as compared with the face-to-face discussions.” “…the virtual classroom is
different. It can arouse some different opinions. ” “I think online discussions are more interesting than face-to-
face discussions because it is more interesting to use the computer. ” “I think it was very interesting because
the tutorial last semester was very boring; the teacher would just say something and we would listen, but now
we can participate more, so it is interesting. I think the online discussions are a very appealing way of learning. ”
Perceived Curiosity (CU) was positively supported by all seven interviewees and recognized in the online
discussions with regard to discovery, exploration and query. We interpreted from the following statements that
perceptions of individual perceived curiosity are higher in online discussions, as compared to face-to-face
discussions. “If I typed in my own comments and didn ‘t look at theirs, they will tell me that next time I need to
look more at their comments, their opinions and not just formalize my own, so I need to explore different options
” “…sometimes you want to say something but you find that others have already pointed it out, so it will
encourage you to search for more points so you can add more opinions. ” “Quite motivated I think. I haven’t fully
adapted to it, but I think it has many advantages like new ideas…hmmm…may be more complete opinions and
things…it’s quite good.” “Hmmm…I will motivate myself to think about more points and offer more information to
others and then we can form our solution in our group. I felt motivated because a lot of different opinions rush to
you and a lot of fresh ideas come to your mind. ” This indicated that the importance of the human dimension
and need for interactivity were significant motivational forces in all online discussions. Commenting on this, a
student said, “I think I am highly motivated by using the online discussions. ” A key feature that emerged from
these evaluations is an individual student’s intrinsically motivated desire for learning through online discussions.
Thus, the online discussions enabled and encouraged a “learning to learn” approach as is evident from the
following opinions of some of the students: “As I mentioned before with the online discussions, we can learn
from others but we have to concentrate more and it is easy to move onto other topics with the face-to-face
discussions. As we could chat about other things very easily, the online discussions increased our efficiency. ” “I
think it’s also highly effective because of the information ways…the ways the information is provided and also I
said it’s more efficient to use this, because we cannot discuss about some stupid things. So I feel it is [online
discussions] very effective in assisting my learning. ” Our findings from the qualitative study also illustrated that
some students would have preferred the convenience to attend the online discussions or participate from
wherever they were. As a student pointed out, “I think only this course has provided the online discussions and
we have only been able to discuss in the class, in this tutorial and we don’t have time to discuss online outside
of the class on other occasions. ” Finally, a more widely held perception among students was that the skills of
presentation and communication in the online discussions were useful and convenient from a practical
standpoint. For example, a student was of the opinion that, “Of course we pay more attention to both the skills
of presentation and skills from the book during the presentation. The presentation is mixed with those most
useful things and that’s the part I like very much. ” From an overview, the results demonstrated that students
were comfortable using technology supported online discussions, through application of the “Blackboard(TM)
Virtual Classroom.” Students excelled in the use of the “Blackboard(TM) Virtual Classroom” and these online
discussions demonstrated strong support for the six intrinsic motivation constructs (i.e. perceived competence,
perceived challenge, feedback, perceived curiosity, perceived interest and perceived choice). The results from
this study paint a realistic account of the factors supporting individual student intrinsic motivation in technology-
supported online discussions. Findings from the qualitative research were able to unravel which factors support
individual student intrinsic motivation. Results showed that five constructs (i.e. perceived competence,
perceived challenge, feedback, perceived interest and perceived curiosity) were strongly supported, with partial
support for the construct of perceived choice (Table 4). Though generally consistent, some students felt that
their choices in the online discussions were limited because they did not have the options of when or where

21 January 2013 Page 10 of 17 ProQuest

they could discuss online. The following emergent trends were noticeable: All the students found the online
discussions most stimulating. These types of synchronous activities seemed more familiar to them and gave
them ample opportunities to influence the directions of the topics under discussion. A significant benefit arising
from the online discussions was that these discussions compelled students to give more serious thought to the
issues being discussed online and the effects the use of technology has on their learning behaviors. Another
significant benefit of communicating via computer seemed to include individual development of thoughts and
ideas, feeling part of an online community, gaining insights about different people and learning from each other.
Students felt that by using the computers for online discussions, they could learn faster, become more creative
and write better. They felt they had more control over their learning behaviors and more opportunities to practice
their written English dialogue skills. As a result, the online discussions appeared to enhance their opportunities
for learning. Participants in the online discussions seemed less apprehensive about evaluation felt less affected
by wait time and other elements of traditional face-to-face interactions, thereby enabling consistent participation.
Students who were shy or felt inhibited in face-to-face discussions, found a “voice” in online discussions and
tended to participate more actively in these discussions. 7. DISCUSSION AND FUTURE WORK The findings of
the study indicated that online discussions are significantly and positively related to higher levels of individual
perceived competence. In general, we found that individual perceived competence developed out of an innate
desire to achieve success in the online discussions in this study. The positive relationship between online
discussions and individual perceived competence could result in an increase in an individual’s intrinsic
motivation. The results of the study indicated that the subjects found the tasks to be the most challenging.
Expectations of personal efficacy determine whether an individual’s coping behavior will be initiated, how much
task-related effort will be expended and how long that effort will be sustained despite disconfirming evidence
(Deng, Doll, &Truong, 2004; Stadjkovic &Luthans, 1998). The online discussions in our study seemed to
emphasize the success-feedback loop quite well. When student were please with their efforts, especially when
they saw improvement, they invested more effort. Improvement came through self-evaluation, practice and
more evaluation. This enhanced success and perpetuated a positive learning atmosphere. The findings in this
study indicated that online discussions were found to lead to more positive feedback in the form of verbal
praise. This indicates that individual feedback in the form of verbal praise was an important factor supporting
individual intrinsic motivation. The online discussions seemed to encourage positive feedback offered by
subjects in this study, by providing clear (quality rather than amount of) information about the success of their
discussions. Individual perceived choice was a significant factor supporting individual intrinsic motivation in
online discussions. As such, an individual may invariably be intrinsically motivated in technology-supported
contexts offering choice, whereas no-choice contexts may be associated with decreased levels of individual
intrinsic motivation. Clearly, different individuals have different preferences and certainly the more choices there
are available, the more these individuals will be able to find and select alternatives that best match their
personal preferences. Making choices in online discussions may also give a sense of autonomy, control and
empowerment. The findings also indicated that the online discussions were found to lead to a more positive
perception of an individual’s interest. Certain subjects may have had a more positive perception of their interest
in the online discussions, as they may have been more motivated to do so across time and in different
situations, so their behavior may have been intrinsically motivated and consequently, directed by a deep, long-
lasting interest that emanated from within (Renninger, 2000). Online discussions were also found to lead to a
more positive perception of an individual’s curiosity. Subjects seemed to derive pleasure from the online
discussions, as this provided them with a level of surprise, conflicting discrepancy and novelty. Designing
technologies to stimulate curiosity is about designing effective strategies that are more appropriate for existing
and available technologies. It is imperative to address an individual’s differences in his or her pre-disposition to
be curious when presented with novel, incongruous, complex and unfamiliar stimuli (factors that stimulate
curiosity). This is especially relevant in designing interactive learning environments, such as online discussions

21 January 2013 Page 11 of 17 ProQuest

that could extend an individual’s state of curiosity into what Csikszentmihalyi (1988) refers to as flow – where
just the right amount of stimulation leads to intrinsic motivation. For future research, we strongly suggest
investigation of the various aspects of Malone and Lepper’s individual intrinsic motivation types such as fantasy,
playfulness and control (Malone &Lepper, 1987). Valuable information can be garnered from such research. For
instance, Malone and Lepper (1987) mentioned that, the extent to which individuals are treating technology
systems, “Not as tools to achieve external goals, but as toys to use for their own sake,” increases the fantasy
and control aspect of the system, thus increasing intrinsic motivation. By redesigning these environments in
which fantasy and control are present, in an intrinsically appealing way, higher levels of motivation could result,
along with more time spent interacting with the technology. Future comprehensive research designs may
require attention to be paid to both environmental and individual variables. One environmental dimension,
understudied but with likely implications for individual intrinsic motivation, is the social environment. Social
information processing (Salancik &Pfeffer, 1978), may affect individual attitudes and responses and has been
shown along with objective task characteristics, to influence task perceptions and task behavior (Griffin,
Bateman, Wayne, &Head, 1987). Opinions of in-groups may undermine intrinsic motivation or be a source of it,
perhaps with more impact in collectivistic, rather than in individualistic cultures (Iyengar &Lepper, 1999). Future
research may also benefit from using other sources of data such as, computer file exchange, electronic meeting
logs and online discussion transcripts. Data could be analyzed in relation to specific key participants, settings,
behavior and activities, relevant to the theoretical framework and the emergent interests and outcomes.
Additionally, other dependent variables, such as fantasy (Malone &Lepper, 1987; Parker &Lepper, 1992) and
control (Barter &Connell, 1984), referred to earlier and creativity (Amabile, 1996), relevant to assessing the
effects of online and face-toface discussions on factors supporting individual student intrinsic motivation, could
also extend the scope of future studies. The above suggestions for future research could potentially build upon
our results, because such research may be essential in order to improve our understanding of the effects of
online and face-to-face discussions on factors supporting individual student intrinsic motivation. For example,
the results of this study can be used as base-line data for future studies. In addition, the results garnered from
this study may also enable the development of improved methods of integrating technology into the classroom
environment and consequently be used as a knowledge construction tool in which individual students work
together in a collaborative setting. Such a learning environment allows students to actively discover their own
thought processes and apply new knowledge appropriately. 8. CONCLUSION In our research, six types of
individual factors were examined – perceived competence, perceived challenge, feedback, perceived choice,
perceived interest and perceived curiosity. The findings from our study reveal that there is neither an exclusive
list of influential factors nor a universal model for all situations supporting individual student intrinsic motivation
in technology-supported environments. What this study endeavors to contribute, instead, is to construct a
framework that illustrates a holistic approach integrating individual-level constructs and establishing a model
that describes the effects of these factors in online discussions. Our study of assessing the individual-level
factors supporting student intrinsic motivation in online discussions is significant to future reviews, undertaken to
study the Motivation Theory and its research and application. Intrinsic motivation represents a generalized
tendency to be active in an individual’s encounters with the environment. As we have demonstrated in our
literature review of this paper, intrinsic motivation is based on the self-determining needs for competence,
autonomy and relatedness (Reeve, Deci, &Ryan, 2004; Ryan &Deci, 2004). Evidence from prior research,
indicates that the intrinsically motivated activity that an individual participates in, tends to be associated with
increased cognitive flexibility and higher self-esteem, compared to an externally controlled activity (E. L. Deci
&Ryan, 1992). In the course of this study, examining technologysupported classroom contexts and integrating
the findings into theory and research was a challenging task. However, findings from the qualitative research
were able to unravel which factors supporting individual student intrinsic motivation in online discussions, may
significantly enhance student intrinsic motivation in technology-supported learning environments. The disparity

21 January 2013 Page 12 of 17 ProQuest

between online and face-to-face discussions will narrow in the future as technology advances and students feel
less inhibited (and have more control) in its use (Vogel, Shroff, Kwok, &Coombes, 2002). We have seen that
online discussions (i.e. synchronous communication technology) provide unlimited opportunities for quick
exchange of ideas, while asynchronous communication technology affords users more time to analyze and
prepare contributions, as a result of the self-paced nature of the medium (Bonk, Fischler, &Graham, 2000).
Online discussions may also facilitate a more inclusive environment, by providing more opportunities for equal
participation and collaborative learning than traditional face-to-face discussions, thus enabling shy or reluctant
students to communicate more comfortably with their peers. This presents a more egalitarian environment than
the traditional face-to-face discussions. The use of interactive technologies may provide educators a valuable
guide for designing technologies that considers principles of all three pedagogies where the individual learner
may find him or herself in an environment that both instructs about subject matter and encourages him/her to
construct knowledge from subject matter more meaningfully and effectively than ever before (Bendar,
Cunningham, Duffy, &Perry, 1992). As such, these social interactions have the potential to enhance individual
construction of knowledge by engaging the individual learner in activities that are interesting, challenging but not
too difficult, arousing his or her perception of curiosity, permitting him or her to make decisions and allowing him
or her to exercise control in terms of setting his or her own pace in the technology-supported online activities (T.
Duffy &Jonassen, 1992; T. M. Duffy &Cunningham, 1996). References 9. REFERENCES Alavi, M., Wheeler,
B., &Valacich, J. S. (1995). “Using IT to reengineer education: An exploratory investigation of collaborative
telelearning.” MIS Quarterly. 19(3), pp. 293-312. Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, Co:
Westview Press. Beaudin, B. P. (1999). “Keeping online asynchronous discussions on topic.” Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks. 3(2). pp. 41-53 Bendar, A. K., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T. M., &Perry, J. D.
(1992). Theory into practice: How do we link? In T.M. Duffy &D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the
technology of instruction: A conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Berlyne, D.
(1954). A theory of human curiosity. British Journal of Psychology, 45, 180-191. Berlyne, D. E. (1978).
“Curiosity and learning.” Motivation and Emotion. 2, pp. 97-175. Bonk, C. J., Fischler, R., &Graham, C. R.
(2000). Getting smarter on the SmartWeb. In D. G. Brown (Ed.), Teaching with technology. Bolton, MA: Anker
Publishing Co. Bordia, P. (1997). “Face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication: A synthesis of the
experimental literature.” Journal of Business Communication. 34, pp. 99-120. Brophy, J. (1983).
“Conceptualizing student motivation.” Educational Psychologist. 18(3), pp. 200-215. Brown, K. W., &Ryan, R.
M. (2004). Fostering healthy selfregulation from within and without: A self-determination theory perspective. In
A. Linley &S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 105-124). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Chong, S. M.
(1998). Models of asynchronous computer conferencing for collaborative learning in large college classes. In
Bonk and King (Eds.) Electronic collaborators (pp. 157-182). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Collins, A.
(1990). Cognitive apprenticeship and instructional technology. In Idol, L. and B. F. Jones (eds.), Educational
values and cognitive instruction: Implications for reform. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). The flow experience and its significance for human psychology. In M.
Csikszentmihalyi &I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in
consciousness (pp. 57-97). New York: Cambridge University Press. Deci, E. (1975). Intrinsic Motivation. New
York: Plenum Press. Deci, E., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B., &Leone, D. (1994). “Facilitating internalization: The self-
determination theory perspective.” Journal of Personality. 62, pp. 121142. Deci, E., &Ryan, R. (1980). “Self-
determination theory: When mind mediates behavior.” The Journal of Mind and Behavior. 1(1), pp. 33-43. Deci,
E., &Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and self determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
Deci, E., Vallerand, R., Pelletier, L., &Ryan, R. (1991). “Motivation and education: the self determination
perspective.” Educational Psychologist. 26, pp. 321-346. Deci, E. L., &Ryan, R. M. (1987). “The support of
autonomy and the control of behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 53, pp. 1024-1037. Deci,
E. L., &Ryan, R. M. (1992). The initiation and regulation of intrinsically motivated learning and achievement. In

21 January 2013 Page 13 of 17 ProQuest

A. K. Boggiano, &Pittman, T. S. (Eds.), Achievement and motivation: A social-developmental perspective. In
(pp. 77-114). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Deci, E. L., &Vansteenkiste, M. (2004). “Self-
determination theory and basic need satisfaction: Understanding human development in positive psychology.”
Ricerche di Psichologia. 27, pp. 17-34. Dember, W. N., &Earl, R. W. (1957). “Analysis of exploratory,
manipulatory and curiosity behaviors.” Psychological Review. 64, 91-96. Deng, X., Doll, W. J., &Truong, D.
(2004). “The determinants and consequences of computer self-efficacy in an ongoing use context.” Behavior
&Information Technology. 23(6), pp. 395-412. Denzin, N. K., &Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative
research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Duffy, T., &Jonassen, D. H. (1992). Constructivism: New implications for
Instructional Technology. In Duffy T., Jonassen D. H. (eds.), Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction
(pp. 1-16). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Duffy, T. M., &Cunningham, D. J. (1996).
Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of
research for educational communications and technology (pp. 170198). New York: Simon &Schuster.
Greenfield, P. M., &Cocking, R. R. (1996). Interacting with video. Advances in applied developmental
psychology (Vol. 11). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp. Griffin, R. W., Bateman, T. S., Wayne, S. J., &Head,
T. C. (1987). “Objective and social factors as determinants of task perceptions and responses: An integrative
framework and empirical investigation.” Academy of Management Journal. 30, pp. 501-503. Gulikers, J.,
Bastiaens, T., &Martens, R. (2005). “The surplus value of an authentic learning environment.” Computers in
Human Behavior. 21(3), pp. 509-521. Harter, S., &Connell, J. P. (1984). “A model of children’s achievement and
related self-perceptions of competence, control and motivation orientation.” Advances in Motivation and
Achievement. 3, pp. 219-250. Hiltz, S. R. (1990). “Collaborative learning: The virtual classroom approach.”
Technological Horizons in Education Journal. 17(10), pp. 59-65. Hodges, C. B. (2004). “Designing to motivate:
Motivational techniques to incorporate in Å-learning experiences.” Journal of Interactive Online Learning. 2(3),
pp. 1-7. Howles, T. (2005). Work in progress – “Intrinsic motivation as a predictor of success in computer
science.” Paper presented at the Frontiers in Education, 2005. FIE ’05. Proceedings 35th Annual Conference.
Iyengar, S. S., &Lepper, M. R. (1999). “Rethinking the value of choice: A cultural perspective on intrinsic
motivation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 76, pp. 349-366. Jonassen, D., Peck, K., &Wilson, B.
(1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Publishing.
Kashdan, T. B., &Fincham, F. D. (2004). Facilitating curiosity: A social and self-regulatory perspective for
scientifically based interventions. In P. A. Linley &S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice (pp.
482503). New Jersey: Wiley. Keller, H., Schneider, K., &Henderson, B. (1994). Curiosity and exploration. Berlin:
Springer-Verlag. Keller, J. M., &Suzuki, K. (2004). “Learner motivation and E-learning design: a multinationally
validated process.” Journal of Educational Media. 29(3), pp. 229-239. Leidner, D. E., &Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1995).
“The use of information technology to enhance management school education: A theoretical view.” MIS
Quarterly. 19(3), 265-291. Lepper, M. R., Henderlong, J., &Gingras, I. (2000). Turning “play” into “work” and
“work” into “play”: 25 years of research on intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation. In C. Sansone &J. M.
Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp.
257-307): Academic Press. Malone, T., &Lepper, M. (1987). Making learning fun: taxonomy of intrinsic
motivations for learning. In Aptitude, Learning and Instruction, Volume 3, Cognitive and Affective Process
Analyses. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Markland, D., &Hardy, L. (1997). “On the factorial and construct
validity of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory: Conceptual and operational concerns.” Research Quarterly for
Exercise and Sport. 68, pp. 20-32. Martens, R., Gulikers, J., &Bastiaens, T. (2004). “The impact of intrinsic
motivation on e-learning in authentic computer tasks.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 20, pp. 368-376.
McCombs, B. L. (1991). “Motivation and lifelong learning.” Educational Psychologist. 26(2), pp. 117-127. Miles,
M. B., &Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis. A sourcebook of new methods. Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage. Müller-Hartmann, A. (2000). “The role of tasks in promoting intercultural learning in electronic learning
networks.” Language Learning and Technology. 4(2). pp. 129-147. Parker, L., &Lepper, M. (1992). “The effects

21 January 2013 Page 14 of 17 ProQuest

of fantasy contexts on children’s learning and motivations; making learning more fun.” Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology. 62, pp. 625-633. Pittman, R. S., Davey, M. E., Alafat, K. A., Wetherill, K. V., &Kramer,
N. A. (1980). “Informational versus controlling verbal rewards.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 6,
pp. 228-233. Reeve, J., &Deci, E. (1996). “Elements of the competitive situation that affect intrinsic motivation.”
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 22(1), pp. 57-71. Reeve, J., Deci, E. L., &Ryan, R. M. (2004).
Selfdetermination theory: A dialectical framework for understanding socio-cultural influences on student
motivation. In S. V. Etten &M. Pressley (Eds.), Big Theories Revisited (pp. 31-60). Greenwich, CT: Information
Age Press. Renninger, K. A. (2000). Individual interest and its implications for understanding intrinsic
motivation. In C. Sansone &J. M. Harakiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal
motivation and performance. New York: Academic Press. Rubin, I. B., &Rubin, H. J. (1995). Qualitative
interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Ryan, R. M. (1994). The Nature of the self in
autonomy and relatedness. In J. Strauss &G. R. Goethals (Eds.), The self: Interdisciplinary approaches (pp.
208-238). New York: Springer-Verlag. Ryan, R. M., &Deci, D. L. (2000). “Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations:
classic definitions and new directions.” Contemporary Educational Psychology. 25, pp. 54-67. Ryan, R. M.,
&Deci, E. L. (2000). “Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development
and well-being.” American Psychologist 55, pp. 68-78. Ryan, R. M., &Deci, E. L. (2002). An overview of
selfdetermination theory. In E. L. Deci &R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research.
Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press. Ryan, R. M., &Deci, E. L. (2004). Autonomy is no illusion: Self-
determination theory and the empirical study of authenticity, awareness and will. In J. Greenberg, S. L. Koole
&T. Pyszcynski (Eds.), Handbook of Experimental Existential Psychology (pp. 449-479). New York: Guilford
Press. Salancik, G. R., &Pfeffer, J. (1978). “A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task
design.” Administrative Science Quarterly. 23, pp. 224-252. Scardamalia, M., &Bereiter, C. (1994). “Computer
Support for Knowledge-building communities.” Journal of the Learning Sciences. 3(3), pp. 265-283. Schiefele,
U. (1991). “Interest, learning and motivation.” Educational Psychologist. 26, pp. 299-323. Schunk, D. H. (2000).
“Coming to terms with motivation constructs.” Contemporary Educational Psychology. 25(1), pp. 116-119.
Sengupta, S. (2001). “Exchanging ideas with peers in network-based classrooms: an aid or a pain?” Language
Learning &Technology. 5f 1). pp. 103-134. Shroff, R. H., Vogel, D. R., Coombes, J., &Lee, F. (2007). “Student
e-learning intrinsic motivation: A qualitative analysis.” Communications of the Association for Information
Systems. 19(12), pp. 241-260. Stadjkovic, A., &Luthans, F. (1998). “Social cognitive theory and self-efficacy:
Going beyond traditional motivational and behavioral approaches.” Organizational Dynamics. 26(4), pp. 62-76.
Teo, C. B, Chang, S. C, &Gay, K. L. (2006). “Pedagogy Considerations for E-leaming.” International Journal of
Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. 3(5), pp. 3-26. Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: analysis
types and software tools. New York: Falmer. Vallerand, R. J., &Reid, G. (1984). “On the causal effects of
perceived competence on intrinsic motivation: A test of cognitive evaluation theory.” Journal of Sport
Psychology. 6, pp. 94-102. Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., &Deci, E. L. (2004).
“Motivating learning, performance and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and
autonomy-supportive contexts.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 87, pp. 246-260. Vogel, D.,
&Klassen, J. (2001). “Technology-supported learning: status, issues and trends.” Journal of Computer Assisted
learning. 17, pp. 104-114. Vogel, D., Shroff, R. H., Kwok, S., &Coombes, J. (2002, September 2-4). “Student e-
learning intrinsic motivation: A qualitative analysis.” Paper presented at the Pacific Asia Conference on
Information Systems, Tokyo, Japan. Walker, C. Q., Greene, B. A., &Mansell, R. A. (2006). “Identification with
academics, intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy as predictors of cognitive engagement.” Learning
&Individual Differences. 16(1), pp. 1-12. White, R. (1959). “Motivation reconsidered: The concept of
competence.” Psychological Review. 66, pp. 297-333. Yin, R. K. (1994). case Study Research: Design and
Methods (2 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Zinser, O., Young, J., &King, P. (1982). “The influence of verbal
reward on intrinsic motivation in children.” Journal of General Psychology. 106, pp. 85-91. AuthorAffiliation

21 January 2013 Page 15 of 17 ProQuest

Ronnie H. Shroff The Hong Kong Institute of Education 10 Lo Ping Road Tai Po, New Territories, Hong Kong
Douglas R. Vogel John Coombes Department of Information Systems City University of Hong Kong Tat Chee
Avenue Hong Kong AuthorAffiliation AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES Ronnie H. Shroff is a Post-Doctoral Research
Fellow at the Hong Kong Institute of Education. His professional interests include the use of technology to
support social constructivist learning, affective learning, collaborative learning and outcome-based teaching and
learning environments. Doug Vogel is a Professor (Chair) of Information Systems and an AIS Fellow. He has
published widely and directed extensive research on group support systems, knowledge management and
technology support for education. Details can be found at: htttp://www.is.cityu.edu.hk/staff7 isdoug/cv/. John
Coombes is a Research Fellow at the City University of Hong Kong researching areas of group support
systems, systems development, systems and education, and multimedia information systems. Appendix
APPENDIX Student Interview Protocol For case Study on intrinsic motivation in online learning (Note: Interviews
will be conducted with FB2501 students. This document focuses on the student interview protocol) [Interviewer
Note: As the opening of the interview, the interviewer will introduce himself and provide a brief idea of the
interview objective] [Interviewer Note: The following demographic and general questions will be used to provide
additional background and engage the interviewee in talking about the topic area] Demographics Personal
information (introduction icebreaker) a. Can you give me a brief overview of yourself? b. What general aspects
of education do you find most interesting? The course in general 1. In general, why did you choose to study this
course? 2. What are your course expectations? [Interviewer Note: The type of learning activity to be examined
within the FB2S01 course is the online discussions using “Virtual Classroom” of “Blackboard(TM)”. The
following sections strive to examine the use of the “Virtual Classroom” relative to the theoretical constructs
underlying this interview. Perceived Competence 3. How competent did you feel when engaged in the online
discussions? 4. To what extent did you feel you were skillful in the online discussions? Challenge 5. To what
extent did you feel the online discussions were challenging to you personally? 6. What kinds
difficulties/problems did you encounter in the online discussions and were you able to overcome them?
Feedback 7. To what extent do you think the other group members provided effective feedback in the online
discussions? 8. Did you find the feedback provided by the group members useful to you and if so in what ways?
Perceived Choice 9. How much choice did you feel you had in the online discussions? 10. To what extent could
you choose when and what to discuss in the online discussions? Interest 11. What kinds of things captured your
interest in the online discussions? Could you please provide an example? 12. How effective were the online
discussions in creating interest in the subject? Perceived Curiosity 13. Did the online discussions arouse your
curiosity about the topics being discussed? 14. Did the online discussions encourage you to probe and explore
a variety of issues you might not have otherwise considered? What are some specific examples? [Interviewer
Note: the focus of the following section would be to get some specific feedback related to technology support
that may inhibit or encourage intrinsic motivation] Technology Support 15. Overall, how self-motivated were you
in the online discussions? Can you provide some specific examples 16. How effective were the online
discussions in assisting you in your learning? Final Comments 17. Are there any other things you would like to
add or comment upon?
Subject: Motivation; College students; Theory; Technological change; Distance learning
Publication title: Journal of Information Systems Education
Volume: 19
Issue: 1
Pages: 111-126
Number of pages: 16

21 January 2013 Page 16 of 17 ProQuest

Publication year: 2008
Publication date: Spring 2008
Year: 2008
Publisher: EDSIG
Place of publication: West Lafayette
Country of publication: United States
Journal subject: Computers–Electronic Data Processing, Education–Computer Applications
ISSN: 10553096
Source type: Scholarly Journals
Language of publication: English
Document type: Feature
Document feature: Diagrams;Tables;References
ProQuest document ID: 200115872
Document URL: http://search.proquest.com/docview/200115872?accountid=8289
Copyright: Copyright EDSIG Spring 2008
Last updated: 2010-06-06
Database: ProQuest Research Library,ABI/INFORM Global

_______________________________________________________________
Contact ProQuest
Copyright  2012 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. – Terms and Conditions

21 January 2013 Page 17 of 17 ProQuest

http://www.proquest.com/go/contactsupport

http://search.proquest.com/info/termsAndConditions

  • Assessing Individual-level Factors Supporting Student Intrinsic Motivation in Online Discussions: A Qualitative Study
Still stressed with your coursework?
Get quality coursework help from an expert!