Study Habits, Skills, and Attitudes: The Third Pillar Supporting Collegiate Academic Performance
Abstract
Study habit, skill, and attitude inventories and constructs were found to rival standardized tests and previous grades as predictors of academic performance, yielding substantial incremental validity in predicting academic performance. This meta-analysis ( N = 72,431, k = 344) examines the construct validity and predictive validity of 10 study skill constructs for college students. We found that study skill inventories and constructs are largely independent of both high school grades and scores on standardized admissions tests but moderately related to various personality constructs; these results are inconsistent with previous theories. Study motivation and study skills exhibit the strongest relationships with both grade point average and grades in individual classes. Academic specific anxiety was found to be an important negative predictor of performance. In addition, significant variation in the validity of specific inventories is shown. Scores on traditional study habit and attitude inventories are the most predictive of performance, whereas scores on inventories based on the popular depth-of-processing perspective are shown to be least predictive of the examined criteria. Overall, study habit and skill measures improve prediction of academic performance more than any other noncognitive individual difference variable examined to date and should be regarded as the third pillar of academic success.
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?
First-year college students contend with a variety of personal, cognitive, and social demands that can impact sleep habits, which have implications for learning.
“As such, first-year college students contend with a variety of personal, cognitive, and social demands that can impact sleep habits, which have implications for learning (17).”
From Nightly sleep duration predicts grade point average in the first year of college (2023) · cites this paper as [17]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 260 · Cited by 780
- Authors
- Credé, M., & Kuncel, N. R.
- Affiliations
- University at Albany, State University of New York (US)
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Corresponding author
- Credé, Marcus
- Venue
- Perspectives on Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-11
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 425-453
- ISSN
- 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-6924
- OpenAlex
- W2062094747
- Semantic Scholar
- 2004191a30fd07b5e7d437e59f1aa1cb3b8fb2da
- Cited by
- 780
- References
- 260
- Citations by year
- 2026: 55 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 60 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 58 · 2017: 59 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 48 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 33
- FWCI
- 73.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Perspectives on Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Outcomes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
- Keywords
- study habits, study skills, academic performance, university students, incremental validity, construct validity, academic motivation, academic anxiety, levels of processing, personality, grade point average
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