Cited by 741Education, Achievement, and GiftednessEducational Outcomes and InfluencesPsychological Testing and Assessment

The Relationship Between Self and Achievement/Performance Measures

Hansford, B. C., Hattie, J. A.·1982·Review of Educational Research

Abstract

This meta-analysis examines the relationship between the various self-measures and measures of performance and achievement. The statistical results of 128 studies are transformed to a common measure, namely, correlation coefficients. These studies represent a total sample of 202,823 persons and produce a data base of 1,136 correlations between self-ratings and performance measures. A range in the relationship of —.77 to .96 was reported with an “average” correlation of .21. It was found that this average relationship was modified by a number of variables. The more significant modifiers of the average relationship were the grade-level of subjects, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, ability of subjects, self-term used in the study, name of self-test used, type and name of performance/achievement measures, and the reliability of both the self-ratings and performance/achievement measures.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3102/00346543052001123

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • The earliest support for the relationship between motivation, focusing specifically on self-concepts and other self beliefs, and academic achievement comes from cross-sectional and correlational studies reviewed by Hansford and Hattie (1982).

    “The earliest support for the relationship between motivation (focusing specifically on selfconcepts and other self beliefs) and academic achievement comes from cross-sectional and correlational studies, reviewed by Hansford and Hattie (1982).”

    From Motivation-Achievement Cycles in Learning: a Literature Review and Research Agenda (2022) · cites this paper as Hansford and Hattie, 1982

  • The extent to which academic self-concept contributes to a general sense of self likely differs across groups.

    “the extent to which academic self-concept contributes to a general sense of self likely differs across groups (Hansford & Hattie, 1982).”

    From Motivation-Achievement Cycles in Learning: a Literature Review and Research Agenda (2022) · cites this paper as Hansford & Hattie, 1982

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hansford, B. C., & Hattie, J. A.
Affiliations
University of New England (AU)
Venue
Review of Educational Research
Published
1982-03
Volume
52
Issue
1
Pages
123-142
ISSN
  • 0034-6543 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-1046
OpenAlex
W2154540489
Cited by
741
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 25
FWCI
21.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Review of Educational Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Outcomes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
self-ratings, self-assessment, achievement, performance indicators, self-efficacy, self-concept, self-perception, grade level, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, ability levels

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