Differences Among Low‐, Average‐ and High‐achieving College Students on Learning and Study Strategies
Abstract
The purpose of the present investigation is to examine the differences between low‐, average‐ and high‐achieving college students on the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory scales. A total of 168 undergraduate students at the United Arab Emirates University participated as subjects. Subjects were classified into three achieving groups based on their grade point average (GPA) scores. Analysis of variance procedures indicated that low‐achieving students scored significantly lower than the average‐ and high‐achieving students on all of the scales. However, no significant differences were observed between the average‐ and high‐achieving groups on any of the scales. Furthermore, a stepwise discriminant analysis revealed that Motivation was the most powerful discriminating factor that separated low‐achieving students from their high‐achieving peers.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
LASSI is useful for intentional grouping by revealing students' learning strategies, such as anxiety management and information processing.
“The Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI; Weinstein et al., 2002) is useful for intentional grouping by revealing students' learning strategies, such as anxiety management and information processing (Albaili, 1997).”
From Intentional Grouping: Impacts on Cognitive and Social Presence in a Hybrid Classroom (2025) · cites this paper as Albaili, 1997
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Study Habits, Skills, and Attitudes: The Third Pillar Supporting Collegiate Academic Performance
Credé, M., & Kuncel, N. R. (2008) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00089.x · Cited by 780 · see citing works
Wolters, C. A., Won, S., & Hussain, M. (2017) · Metacognition and Learning · doi:10.1007/s11409-017-9174-1 · Cited by 186 · see citing works
Intentional Grouping: Impacts on Cognitive and Social Presence in a Hybrid Classroom
Scheidler, B., Layne, K., Gillard, M., & Doucet, B. M. (2025) · Journal of Occupational Therapy Education · doi:10.26681/jote.2025.090210
- Authors
- Albaili, M. A.
- Corresponding author
- Albaili, Mohamed A.
- Venue
- Educational Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1997-03
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 171-177
- ISSN
- 0144-3410 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-5820
- OpenAlex
- W2062455773
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 9.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Outcomes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Learning Styles and Cognitive Differences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- learning strategies, study habits, academic performance, university students, grade point average, motivation, Learning and Study Strategies Inventory, achievement differences
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