Cited by 181Education, Achievement, and GiftednessInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

The structure of academic self-concepts revisited: The nested Marsh/Shavelson model.

Open access
Brunner, Martin, Keller, Ulrich, Dierendonck, Christophe, Reichert, Monique, Ugen, Sonja, Fischbach, Antoine, Martin, Romain·2010·Journal of Educational Psychology

Abstract

The nested Marsh/Shavelson (NMS) model integrates structural characteristics of academic self-concepts that have proved empirically incompatible in previous studies. Specifically, it conceives of academic self-concepts to be subject specific, strongly separated across domains, and hierarchically organized, with general academic self-concept at the top of the hierarchy. In Part 1 of the present study, data from a representative sample of eighth graders (N = 4,847) from Luxembourg showed that the NMS model captures the structure of self-concepts in six core subjects. In Part 2, the NMS model was integrated into a longitudinal extended internal/external frame-of-reference model. The developmental dynamics between general and subject-specific achievement, as measured in Grade 6, and the corresponding academic self-concepts in Grade 8 were examined, with data from a subsample of students (N = 3,045). Given its theoretical and empirical bases, the NMS model has clear potential to guide future research on academic self-concepts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0019644

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • To date, a large amount of empirical research on reciprocal motivation-achievement interactions has mainly studied academic self-concept.

    “However, to date, a large amount of empirical research on reciprocal motivation-achievement interactions has mainly studied ASC (Arens et al., 2019;Brunner et al., 2010;Chen et al., 2013;Dicke et al., 2018;Gottfried et al., 2013;Grygiel et al., 2017;Guay et al., 2003;Guo et al., 2015;Möller et al., 2011;Niepel et al., 2014aNiepel et al., , 2014b;;Retelsdorf et al., 2014;Viljaranta et al., 2014;W”

    From Motivation-Achievement Cycles in Learning: a Literature Review and Research Agenda (2022) · cites this paper as Brunner et al., 2010

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brunner, M., Keller, U., Dierendonck, C., Reichert, M., Ugen, S., Fischbach, A., & Martin, R.
Affiliations
University of Luxembourg (LU)
Venue
Journal of Educational Psychology
Published
2010-11
Volume
102
Issue
4
Pages
964-981
ISSN
  • 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2176
OpenAlex
W1988248578
Cited by
181
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
FWCI
6.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Open Repository and Bibliography (University of Luxembourg) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Open Repository and Bibliography (University of Luxembourg) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Luxembourg Ministry for Education
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
academic self-concept, nested models, self-concept structure, academic performance, self-concept dimensions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review