Introduction

Choosing career or educational paths—an important milestone of adolescence—is dependent upon one’s ability to build skills and competence in a particular domain of interest. Although competence and expertise are necessary for mastering any subject, success is more likely when individuals demonstrate high motivation during their pursuit of that field (Wigfield and Eccles 2002). This motivation is enhanced when individuals have high expectations of success, interest, and value associated with a particular field (Wang and Degol 2016a). Furthermore, this student motivation has been demonstrated to be malleable and responsive to changes in sociocultural factors (Rosenzweig and Wigfield 2017; Yeager and Walton 2011).

Despite the importance of considering sociocultural contexts in motivation research, the current body of achievement motivation literature focuses on Western countries with relatively limited understanding of changing patterns of student motivation between Western and Eastern countries. Although no systematic review examines nationality-based differences in student achievement motivation across East Asian and Western countries, recent studies have found substantial cross-cultural differences in students’ motivation between East Asian and Western countries based on large-scale international assessments, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). For example, results indicated that East Asian students have lower academic self-concepts and intrinsic and instrumental values than Western students, even though they have higher academic performance (King and McInerney 2014a, b). Importantly, this pattern drives the negative relationship between motivation and academic performance at the country level, which is contradictory to the positive relationship demonstrated at the individual level, thereby resulting in a paradox for motivation-achievement researchers (He and Van de Vijver 2016). This paradoxical phenomenon has received considerable attention, calling for research on the influence of culture on student motivational process (e.g., King and McInerney 2014a, b; Zusho and Clayton 2011). Accordingly, a review addressing national and cultural differences in achievement motivation will not only validate the applicability and generalizability of motivation theories across cultural contexts, but it will also improve the field’s understanding of the universality versus cultural specificity of motivational constructs (Klassen 2004; Wang 2016).

This article is a systematic review of current discourse surrounding developmental and gender differences in achievement motivation in the disciplines of mathematics and English, offering comparisons of how these patterns manifest between Western and East Asian countries. Western countries include Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and United States, while East Asian countries consist of China, Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan. Guided by expectancy–value theory (EVT), this review focuses on ability self-concept and task values as two prominent motivational constructs. Three central questions are addressed in this review: (a) Does the association between student motivation and educational outcomes vary by countries?; (b) Do students develop distinct trajectories of ability self-concept and task values across countries?; and (c) Are there gender differences in these trajectories? In the first section, the authors provide a brief overview of EVT and its application to understanding age and gender differences in the development of achievement motivation between Western and East Asian countries. Next, they examine the extent to which developmental changes and gender differences in ability self-concept and task values manifest from primary school to secondary school, which is followed by an exploration of how these differences in student motivation vary between Western and East Asian countries. The authors also discuss how insights gained from extant research afford potential contributions to current understanding of sociocultural and contextual factors associated with developmental and gender differences in achievement motivation. The article concludes with the limitations of extant literature and provides suggestions for advancing current knowledge through future research.

Expectancy–Value Theory

EVT is a long-standing theory in the achievement motivation literature that describes why differences in academic performance, course and major selection, and career choice emerge throughout childhood and adolescence. EVT proposes that these variations in academic choices are partly attributed to individual differences in academic motivation (Eccles 1983, 2009). In other words, individuals do not just select courses, majors, or careers in areas that they are highly skilled; they pick educational pathways that they feel motivated to pursue. Hence, individuals must not only have the skills or competencies to pursue a subject domain, but they also must have the motivational drive to pursue the domain (Wigfield and Eccles 2002).

These domain-specific motivational beliefs are comprised of two major constructs: expectancy beliefs (e.g., ability self-concept) and subjective task values. Expectancy beliefs refer to an individual’s expectations of future success in a given field (Eccles 1983). If individuals believe they have a high likelihood of successfully completing a task in a particular subject, then they are said to have high expectancy beliefs in that domain. Subjective task values, on the other hand, refer to the value that individuals place on a subject domain (Eccles 2009). These task values include attainment value, utility value, intrinsic value, and cost. Attainment value refers to the extent individuals feel a domain aligns with their core personal goals; utility value is the perceived usefulness of a subject in achieving future goals; intrinsic value denotes an individual’s perceived interest or enjoyment in engaging in a subject; and cost represents the perceived resources it takes to pursue the subject or profession (e.g., time, effort, emotional well-being).

Research has shown that these four task values can be empirically differentiated, though they remain moderately or highly correlated (Conley 2012; Guo et al. 2016; Luttrell et al. 2010; Trautwein et al. 2012). As such, some researchers have combined utility value and attainment value together into a construct labelled importance value (e.g., Jacobs et al. 2002; Watt et al. 2012), while others have merged the three positive task values—attainment, utility, and intrinsic values—together into one task value construct (e.g., Kosovich et al. 2015; Perez et al. 2014). Collectively, expectancy beliefs and task values are distinct yet closely related constructs that define the role of domain-specific motivation in determining personal investment in related subject domains.

Studies have shown that both expectancy beliefs and task values are strong predictors of academic achievement and educational and career choices (Wang and Degol 2014; Wigfield et al. 2016). While individual differences in achievement motivation explain why some students engage more actively with certain material than others, sociocultural and contextual factors also influence patterns and changes in student motivation. Expectancies for success and task values are malleable and highly dependent upon both past and present learning experiences (Eccles 2009). For example, when parents and teachers are supportive, offer encouragement, and communicate high expectations of performance in a certain domain, students are more likely to develop an interest in pursuing a career in that domain (Wang 2012; Wigfield et al. 2006). Likewise, non-verbal messages students receive regarding male or female superiority or suitability in certain domains may foreshadow gender divides in specific careers or fields (Wang and Degol 2016a). Given the impact of different environmental settings on student motivation, it seems reasonable to assume that the cultural context plays a role in shaping student motivation. In particular, Western and East Asian countries differ in ways that may indirectly influence how student motivation is manifested across numerous fields. In the following sections, the authors discuss how culture and context may affect student expectancies and task values.

Sociocultural and Contextual Factors

A growing body of research has centered on how motivational beliefs in mathematics and English differentially develop across East Asian and Western countries (Chiu and Klassen 2010; Guo 2016). Specifically, significant differences in norms, expectations, and attitudes across these countries may explain how and why these motivation differences manifest in children and adolescents. Despite having lower achievement scores across various subjects, Western students tend to have higher ability self-concepts than East Asian students (Chiu and Klassen 2010). While this finding appears to be counterintuitive, the common assumption is that Western and East Asian differences in the development of ability self-concepts are attributed to cultural differences in how adolescents estimate their competence. Ability self-concepts are influenced not only by self-belief (e.g., the nature of social comparison), but also by differing levels of attention to in-group expectations (Chiu and Klassen 2010; Oettingen and Zosuls 2006). For example, social comparisons can involve comparing one’s performance to the performance of higher achieving students (i.e., upward social comparison) or comparing one’s performance to the performance of lower achieving students (i.e., downward social comparison). Western students tend to use downward comparisons when constructing their ability self-concepts, while East Asian students are more likely to use upward comparisons (Chiu and Klassen 2010; White and Lehman 2005). Such a process would enhance the self-beliefs of Western students, as they are more inclined to view themselves in the context of poorer performing students, while lowering the self-beliefs of East Asian students, as they are more inclined to view themselves in the context of higher performing students.

Another relevant main element expected to affect the development of student ability self-concepts across Western and East Asian countries relates to the ways in which the concept of self is viewed within individualistic versus collectivist societies (Kitayama et al. 1997). Individualistic societies encourage independence, competition, and self-expression, while collectivist societies promote in-group conformity, dependence, and cooperation (Kitayama et al. 1997). East Asian countries tend to adopt more of a collectivist mindset, and in these countries, adolescents derive more value from the opinions and feedback of their in-group members (Kitayama et al. 1997), particularly those messages delivered by authority figures such as parents and teachers (Oettingen and Zosuls 2006). Contrarily, adolescents in the more individualistic, Western countries are more likely to focus on their own personal improvement to construct their ability beliefs (Kitayama et al. 1997). There is also a strong likelihood that students in Western countries view their accomplishments as purely their own, while students in East Asian countries are likely to view their own accomplishments as a joint venture among themselves and their parents, peers, and teachers (Chiu and Klassen 2010). As such, students in individualistic societies are expected to have higher ability self-concepts than students in collectivist societies, despite demonstrating lower overall academic performance. These processes illustrate two main points: (a) the construction of ability self-concepts can depend upon the values and norms present within a student’s culture and (b) cultural norms in Western and East Asian countries vary substantially enough to affect the development of student motivation (Klassen 2004; Oettingen and Zosuls 2006).

Researchers have also suggested that cultural values influence student motivation through the different structure of schools in Western and East Asian countries (Karasawa et al. 1997; Salili et al. 2001). As East Asian and Western nations have different cultural values regarding academic ability and motivation, schools could be a primary medium through which these cultural differences are transmitted and further cultivated. For example, in Japan, schools utilize a cooperative task structure which relies upon group-based effort and performance (Karasawa et al. 1997). Therefore, Japanese students may view ability as a collective or joint effort. In contrast, Western nations tend to have schools that are structured around personal mastery, effort, and ability; hence, these students may view ability as more of an individualistic effort. Taken together, constructions of ability self-concepts can also depend upon how cultures construct ability (e.g., performance-based versus mastery-based learning; group-based versus individual-based learning; Salili et al. 2001).

Not only does the structure of the educational system influence ability perceptions, but parents can also provide a mechanism through which cultural values regarding motivational beliefs are transmitted. For example, those in East Asian, collectivist cultures may place more emphasis on respecting parents’ or families’ wishes for academic success than those in Western, individualistic cultures (Wiese and Freund 2011). In fact, several researchers have indicated that parental expectations of success may be a strong motivator for East Asian students as group conformity, cooperation, and in-group co-dependence are highly valued (Eaton and Dembo 1997; Steinberg et al. 1992). Conversely, students in Western countries may be more likely to defy their parents’ expectations, as Western cultures endorse self-reliance and independence more than adherence to group norms. Collectively, achievement motivation is likely to be affected by the cultural emphasis on parental expectations for academic behavior.

Furthermore, sociocultural factors may affect gender differences in student motivation through the extent to which gender norms and roles are conveyed in society (Chiu and Klassen 2010). Cultural stereotypes or beliefs regarding men’s and women’s abilities and suitability for certain careers impact student motivation to perform well or pursue a specific field of study (Cheryan et al. 2017). If cultural stereotypes communicate that women are better suited for English or language learning while men are better suited for STEM-based careers, then women in that culture might be more likely to have lower task values in math and science than men, who might be more likely to have lower task values in English (Nosek et al. 2009). Consequently, culturally informed gender stereotypes can have a powerful impact on how students construct their own perceptions of academic ability and values that affect their academic performance and success in school.

Current Study

As the understanding of motivation and recognition of its importance for learning grows, a pressing need has emerged for a systematic review that integrates extant literature guided by EVT and examines the universality versus cultural specificity of motivation constructs across countries or diverse cultures. A systematic literature review addressing the national and cultural differences in achievement motivation would clarify the role of sociocultural factors in shaping and interacting with youth’s development of motivational beliefs. Using EVT as the guiding conceptual framework, this article aimed to understand whether (1) the association between student motivation and educational outcomes differs by Western versus East Asian countries; (2) students develop diverse developmental trajectories of ability self-concept and task values across Western and East Asian countries; and (3) gender differences in the development of ability self-concept and task values exist across Western and East Asian countries.

Method

A systematic literature search was conducted using the online databases that catalog research abstracts, including Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), JSTOR, PsycINFO, and Social Sciences Citation Index. The following terms and phrases were used: EVT, expectancy, task value, ability self-concept, and value. Each study was examined to determine if they focused on mathematics or English subject domain. The literature search included studies published through the end of 2016 and resulted in a total of 325 studies. To supplement searches of electronic databases, the reference lists of studies relevant to motivational constructs of expectancy and task values were reviewed to identify eligible studies, resulting in five additional studies of potential relevance. The first author then reviewed each article’s title, abstract, and method section to determine its inclusion or exclusion of the study. If the first author judged the abstract and information in the method section to be eligible for inclusion, the full study was obtained for further examination, resulting in 163 documents.

The following criteria were used to determine whether studies should be included or excluded in the analysis. First, studies had to use EVT as the theoretical framework and included ability self-concept or task values as the key motivation constructs. Second, studies were limited to school-aged children and adolescents enrolled in kindergarten-12th grade. Third, studies had to focus on the subject domain of mathematics or English. Fourth, studies had to use measurements of ability self-concept and task values with appropriate reliability (i.e., Cronbach alpha larger than .60) and validity (i.e., construct validity). Fifth, only peer-reviewed empirical studies were included. Furthermore, studies were excluded if they were not published in English and the study focused on measurement validation. These criteria for inclusion and exclusion resulted in 42 articles (see PRISMA in Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow diagram of search results

Full size image

These 42 articles were then coded using a double-coded process (Rosenthal 1991). All studies were independently coded twice by two coders, and all disagreements were resolved by a third independent coder. The initial agreement between two coders was 96% across all studies before discrepancies were discussed and resolved. The authors summarized several characteristics of each study when available and examined similarities and differences between the countries, including (a) developmental changes of measured ability self-concept and task values, (b) gender differences, and (c) study and sample characteristics.

Results

Motivation and Achievement Outcomes Between Western and East Asian Countries

In Western countries, research has supported the EVT framework by demonstrating the importance of motivational beliefs in explaining both developmental and gender differences in academic choices (Wang and Degol 2014; Wigfield et al. 2006). For example, a study utilizing a U.S. sample found cross-lagged associations between ability self-concept and math performance as well as between task values and math performance measured in both 7th and 10th grade (Wang 2012). By 12th grade, 10th-grade adolescents who had higher ability self-concepts and task values in math were more likely to take additional math courses and have stronger career aspirations in math-intensive fields, regardless of their past performance in math (also see Guo et al. 2015a, b for similar findings based on an Australian sample). In another study examining a U.S. sample, expectancy beliefs and task values in literacy measured in 4th grade predicted pleasure of reading in 10th grade, course choices, and career aspirations in 12th grade (Durik et al. 2006).

While a number of researchers have found support for the impact of ability self-concepts and task values on both academic performance and career goals, some work has suggested that ability self-concepts are more consistently linked to academic performance while task values are more consistently linked to future major or career goals (Degol et al. 2017; Eccles 2007; Guo et al. 2016, 2017; Meece et al. 2006; Wang et al. 2015). For instance, in a German sample of high school students, Guo et al. (2016) found that intrinsic value, attainment value, and low cost predicted math engagement and effort over and above the global value factor and ability self-concept. Ability self-concept, however, was still a predominate predictor of math achievement. In a sample of U.S. youth, not only was higher math task value in 12th grade linked to a greater likelihood of choosing a STEM career as an adult, but these math task values played a unique role in women’s STEM career decisions (Wang et al. 2015). Accordingly, task values are important predictors of math outcomes that seem to be particularly essential for females.

Recently, EVT has been examined in East Asian countries to identify if motivational patterns mirror findings from Western populations (e.g., Bong et al. 2012; Chen et al. 2012; Chiu and Xihua 2008; Guo et al. 2015b; Jack et al. 2014; Kadir et al. 2017; Lee 2014; Lee et al. 2014). In general, empirical EVT studies across Western and East Asian countries follow a similar pattern: Ability self-concepts are more predictive of academic achievement, while task values are a better predictor of achievement-related choices. For example, a study with a sample comprised of Taiwanese adolescents found cross-lagged reciprocal associations between math self-concept and math achievement and between Chinese self-concept and Chinese achievement (Chen et al. 2012). Other research has found that for Korean students, mathematics self-concepts predicted middle school students’ achievement indirectly through math task value and math anxiety (Bong et al. 2012). Similarly, interest in mathematics also predicted math achievement indirectly through self-regulation among a Korean sample (Lee et al. 2014).

Utility value may also vary as a function of cultural differences across East Asian and Western nations, as choosing tasks that are considered relevant and useful for accomplishing both short- and long-term goals is likely to be influenced by cultural socialization. Research has suggested that East Asian students may be more sensitive to utility value information that connects their present experiences with their future goals (Ji et al. 2009; Nisbett 2003). These cultural differences may be due to variations in information processing, as East Asian cultures are more likely to focus on connections between the past, present, and future than Western cultures, who are much more proximal-minded and often view the present as independent of the past (Ji et al. 2009; Nisbett 2003). For example, Randel (2001) found that East Asian students were more likely to report that math was useful for their future careers—a distal outcome—whereas Western students were more likely to report that math was useful for problem solving—a more focal, proximal outcome. In sum, students in East Asia seem better able to connect present experiences with future goals than students in Western nations (Maddux and Yuki 2006).

Interventions designed to increase students’ perceptions of the relevance and usefulness of mathematics have also found that Western students increased their utility value more when a proximal value manipulation was used, whereas East Asian students improved the most when a distal value manipulation was used (Harackiewicz et al. 2014; Shechter et al. 2011). Consequently, participants from collectivist cultures may rate an activity as higher in utility value if they find it valuable to their larger social group (Wigfield et al. 2016). In contrast, those from individualistic cultures are more likely to rate an activity’s value in terms of its ability to meet their personal needs. For example, in collectivist cultures, individuals often prioritize their family’s needs over their own, particularly if individual needs conflict with those of their family (Fuligni 2001).

Despite these potential cultural differences in motivational beliefs, very little cross-country work has been conducted using the EVT motivational framework. One of the few studies examining this line of inquiry was a comparison of multiple EVT studies across Western and East Asian countries (Guo 2016). Guo (2016) found that in Hong Kong, socioeconomic status (SES) was more positively related to math utility value than intrinsic value, whereas the relations among SES, math intrinsic value, and utility value were similar in Western countries (e.g., Australia). A possible explanation for this finding is that Hong Kong students tend to be highly motivated toward maintaining their parents’ current social class status (avoiding downward social mobility; Akerlof and Kranton 2000). Thus, Hong Kong students from high-SES families would be more likely to place greater emphasis on educational success, as it helps them maintain their group status and positively contribute to their social group.

The PISA 2012 dataset (OECD 2013) also examined cross-country differences in the relationship between utility value and math achievement. This study found that the relationship between achievement and utility value was significantly stronger for the highest-achieving students in Western countries. However, this pattern disappeared in East Asian countries and even reversed itself in China and Taiwan, indicating that utility value was more important for low-achieving students in some East Asian countries. It is highly likely that these differences were due to the stronger group norm-orientation present within East Asian countries. Adolescents in these contexts use family and school guidelines regarding the usefulness of education as a call to action to improve their own mastery of these educational tasks, particularly when they have a weak subjective sense of their abilities.

Summary

Research in Western and East Asian countries has shown that motivation is strongly associated with achievement and career choice. Specifically, high motivation in a domain (e.g., math, reading) is linked to higher achievement and aspirations for career choice within said domain across both countries. Similarly, research seems to indicate that in both Western and East Asian countries, higher domain-specific ability self-concepts are more strongly associated with higher achievement in that domain, and task values are more strongly associated with educational and career decisions. This evidence converges to suggest that motivation is likely a key ingredient to academic success regardless of the country in which a student resides.

However, not all aspects of motivation’s role in academic success are universal. Rather, there are key differences across countries in the interpretation and purpose of motivation. For example, students in East Asia expressed higher motivation in a subject if they believed it would help them achieve long-term goals, whereas their Western counterparts are more motivated to achieve short-term goals. East Asian students also tend to value a subject if it is meaningful to their family, whereas Western students tend to see value in a subject that is personally meaningful to them. This research indicates that while motivation is universally connected to higher performance and career aspirations, the conditions under which students become highly motivated are culturally dependent.

Finally, SES and achievement play differential roles in motivation across East Asian and Western countries. Stronger associations between motivation and achievement outcomes have been detected for high-achieving Westerners, while for East Asian students, low achievers have demonstrated a stronger association between motivation and achievement. Similarly, Western students are less likely to show differences in the role of motivation across different levels of SES, while higher-SES East Asian students are more likely to experience stronger links between motivation and achievement outcomes. More research on the roles of achievement and SES is needed to determine if these country differences are spurious or represent consistent patterns of variations across countries or cultures. Such work can contribute to a greater understanding of how to motivate low-achieving and low-SES students, as they may face greater sociocultural disadvantages that render them more vulnerable to declines in academic performance.

Developmental Changes in Motivational Beliefs from Primary to Secondary School

Researchers have examined the development of both ability self-concepts and task values in students across several school years (Wang and Degol 2014, 2016). The pretext for this research hinges on the relationship between motivation and achievement: If motivation is closely linked to achievement, then an improved understanding of changes in ability self-concept and task values can help predict which students are at greater risk for academic failure and which are on the right track for academic success. Much of this research has demonstrated that motivation in math and English declines over time, and these decreases become especially pronounced as children transition from elementary to middle or secondary school environments (Fredricks and Eccles 2002; Jacobs et al. 2002).

While these declines have been widely documented, there are two main factors that potentially explain these developmental changes. First, the declines experienced by children are likely to be caused by maturational changes in brain development. In other words, young children are not as adept as adolescents or adults at assessing their strengths and weaknesses across various domains (Eccles et al. 1998; Stipek and Mac Iver 1989). The second main factor relates to environmental changes in the school setting. For example, elementary school settings are frequently characterized by smaller class sizes and less structured, rigid classroom settings and routines than those of secondary school settings (Wang and Degol 2016b; Eccles et al. 1993).

Consistently, researchers have found that academic motivation declines for most students as they advance through the primary and secondary school years in various countries. Indeed, these differences have been noted in Western countries (e.g., the U.S., Canada, Australia, Germany) and East Asian countries (e.g., China, Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore; King and McInerney 2014a, b; Lee and Kim 2014; Shi et al. 2001; Wang and Pomerantz 2009). This research has garnered information about both math and reading self-concept and interest. For example, in Australia, self-perceptions of ability in math and English and subjective task values (i.e., interest and utility) in math and English declined across 7th to 11th grades (Watt 2004). Similarly, ability self-concepts and task values (i.e., utility and interest) in math and English declined on average for students from 1st through 12th grade in a U.S. sample (Jacobs et al. 2002).

A few noteworthy cross-cultural studies have compared motivational changes directly between Western and East Asian countries. For instance, Wang and Pomerantz (2009) examined motivational trajectories during early adolescence in the U.S. and China, finding that students’ motivational beliefs (i.e., value, mastery-orientation) deteriorated over the 7th and 8th grades in both the U.S. and China. American children also demonstrated declines in their motivational behavior (i.e., self-regulated learning and engagement). Contrarily, Chinese children continued to sustain their motivational behavior. In both countries, children’s motivational beliefs and behavior predicted academic achievement over time.

Interestingly, existing research has suggested that students experience a faster decline of motivation in math than in English over time, particularly in East Asian countries (e.g., Gottfried et al. 2007; Jacobs et al. 2002; Lee and Kim 2014; Yeung et al. 2011). Jacobs et al. (2002) found that declines in math motivation were far steeper and more pronounced over time than English, which saw some tapering off and slight recovery of motivation near the end of high school. Based on a Hong Kong sample, King and McInerney (2014a, b) espoused that youth’s self-concept in English slightly increased during junior high school. This finding was replicated in a Korean sample: Math interest declined continuously from 7th through 11th grade, while English self-concept decreased during the middle school years and increased during high school (Lee and Kim 2014).

There may be two explanations for the aforementioned cultural differences in math and English motivation trajectories. First, English is not the first language of East Asian students, and it may be the case that as students progress through higher educational levels, they become more confident in their English language abilities. In addition, English language learning is distinct from mathematics learning in potentially meaningful ways. For example, East Asian students often learn English as a second language due to an interest in traveling abroad, attending colleges in English-speaking nations, or increasing the efficiency of working and communicating with people from English-speaking countries (Gardner 2010). Given the leisure goal of learning English in many East Asian countries, interest in English may experience less steep declines compared to math interest over time.

Summary

Ability self-concept and task values tend to decline across the elementary and middle school years and then stabilize during the high school years; however, these specific trends vary across countries. Although math motivation declines across both Western and Eastern countries, English language learning declines less rapidly in East Asian countries. In fact, recent studies examining heterogeneity in Western samples have revealed more nuanced changes in math and reading motivation during the school years, despite average declines in student motivation. For instance, Archambault et al. (2010) tracked the development of literacy task values from 1st to 12th grade. A total of seven distinct motivational trajectories were identified, and while all seven of these trajectories showed motivational decreases, three experienced positive recovery during the high school years. Likewise, two other recent studies focusing on math and science task values identified groups experiencing positive developmental trajectories during the high school years (Musu-Gillette et al. 2015; Wang et al. 2017a, b). As these studies were conducted with Western samples, more research is needed to determine the extent to which these trajectories are present within East Asian samples.

The Interaction Between Expectancy and Value

Although most non-experimental studies have examined the additive effects of ability self-concept and task values on various learning outcomes (i.e., self-concepts and task values modeled as separate and independent predictors of achievement outcomes in regression models), several researchers have argued that expectancies and values may actually have multiplicative effects on learning outcomes (e.g., Guo et al. 2015a, b; Trautwein et al. 2012). Typically, it is expected to see individuals with higher expectancies or ability self-concepts to also have higher task values and vice versa; however, some individuals report high expectancies and low value, while others report low expectancies and high value. Comparing these subgroups reveals that high value is unable to compensate for low expectancies, and high expectancies are unable to compensate for low value, depending upon the outcome in question (Guo et al. 2016).

Differential patterns have emerged from studies examining the interaction effect between ability self-concept and task value across Western and East Asian countries. The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA2012) examined the relationship between students’ math ability self-concept/interest and performance across countries, indicating that the correlation between math self-concept/interest and performance is stronger for students in East Asian (e.g., Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Hong Kong) versus Western countries (OECD 2013; also see Chiu and Klassen 2010). In addition, researchers have found that the interaction of students’ ability self-concept and values predicted a variety of student outcomes in different academic domains within Western contexts (e.g., Australia, Germany; Guo et al. 2015a, 2016, 2017; Lauermann et al. 2017; Trautwein et al. 2012). Specifically, Guo et al. (2015a) found that high school students were more likely to take advanced math courses, matriculate, and enter STEM fields of study when their math-related expectancies and values were both high, thus indicating a synergistic interaction.

When it comes to achievement, researchers have demonstrated that ability self-concepts or expectancies may matter more than task values. In a German sample, for example, students with low expectancies and high value in both math and English had the lowest achievement in their respective domains, whereas students with high expectancies and high value in math and English had the highest achievement (Trautwein et al. 2012). Yet, when it comes to career choices, interest may matter more than ability self-concepts, at least in math (Guo et al. 2015a, b; Lauermann et al. 2017). For example, Lauermann et al. (2017) found that math self-concept could not compensate for low levels of interest when determining the likelihood of attaining a math-related career. These results support the relative inability of expectancy beliefs and task values to compensate for one another when determining learning outcomes.

In Eastern Asian contexts, however, researchers (Guo et al. 2015b; Lee et al. 2014a, b) have indicated that the value students attach to some achievement activities is more strongly predictive of their achievement behavior more strongly when their ability self-concepts for that activity are low, thereby demonstrating a compensatory interaction. Based on three cohorts of Hong Kong’s TIMSS dataset, Guo et al. (2015b) found that utility value predicted students’ scores on an international standardized math exam and their intentions to pursue advanced education more strongly when their self-concepts were low. This finding suggests that students who have low ability self-concepts may be more likely to use their belief in the usefulness of a subject as a guide in their decisions to pursue that subject, while students with high ability self-concepts may rely on both their self-concepts and utility values to make these decisions. Lee et al. (2014a, b) also found that Korean middle school students with high interest or utility value for learning English were more likely to procrastinate and/or cheat in their English test as their self-ability beliefs decreased. This finding indicates that even if a student has low perceived ability, they will be driven to succeed and achieve (albeit through deceptive methods) if they are highly interested in and highly value the subject or task. Hence, in the drive to succeed, high interest and value may compensate for low self-concept in East Asian students.

Summary

Most studies examining motivational beliefs as predictors of achievement and educational and career choices have focused on the additive role of expectancy beliefs and task values. However, studies that have examined the multiplicative effects of expectancy beliefs and task values have revealed that interactions appear to exist between these two constructs. In both Western and East Asian countries, ability self-concept seems to matter more in determining achievement, while task values matter more in determining educational or career choices. Yet, in Western countries, high expectancy beliefs or high task values cannot fully compensate for low levels in the accompanying domain, with high levels in both often demonstrating the most positive outcomes. In East Asian countries, however, evidence suggests a slight compensatory role whereby high ability self-concept can compensate for low utility value and vice versa, depending on the outcome of interest.

Gender Differences in Motivational Beliefs from Primary to Secondary School

Achievement differences between male and female students have been examined across several countries using TIMSS and PISA assessment data. Five East Asian countries (i.e., Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, and Singapore) were among the highest performing countries in math in both of these assessments (Mullis et al. 2012, 2016; OECD 2013, 2016); yet, the TIMSS assessments showed that gender differences in math achievement were generally very small in 4th and 8th grades in these highest achieving countries (Mullis et al. 2016). A similar pattern of negligible performance difference was found for 15-year-old boys and girls using the PISA assessment (OECD 2013, 2016). In fact, TIMSS countries (including several East Asian and Anglo countries) that participated in both the 1995 and 2015 waves of data collection have shown a narrowing of the gender gap across this 20-year window: The male advantage has decreased, and a female advantage has emerged in several countries (Mullis et al. 2016). Specifically, boys only outperformed girls in math achievement in six countries (average nine-point difference in math achievement), while 26 countries (two-thirds of total participating countries) demonstrated no gender differences, and seven countries showed a female advantage (average 17-point difference in math achievement). By 2015, three of the high-performing countries (i.e., Hong Kong, Japan, and South Korea) showed no gender differences in math ability. In Singapore, girls outperformed boys by an average nine-point difference in 2015.

Researchers examining ability self-concepts and interest in math and English have found clear gender differences across both Western and East Asian countries. Despite gender similarities in achievement, boys have reported more positive math self-concept and interest than girls in Western countries (Else-Quest et al. 2010; Hyde 2014; Wang et al. 2013). In East Asian countries (e.g., Hong Kong and Korea), girls have shown higher ability self-concept and interest in English, whereas boys have displayed higher ability self-concept and intrinsic value in math (Guo et al. 2015b; King and McInerney 2014a, b; Lee and Kim 2014). Studies have overwhelmingly demonstrated that girls have higher English self-concept and interest than boys in both Western and East Asian countries (OECD 2007; see Watt 2016 for a review).

Although some studies focusing on secondary school transition have found that the gender difference in math and English motivation remains constant across grades (Nagy et al. 2010; Petersen and Hyde 2017; Watt 2004), other research has shown that the gender gap in math motivation in American students decreases as they progress through 1st through 12th grade because boys’ motivation declines more rapidly than girls’ (Fredricks and Eccles 2002; Jacobs et al. 2002). Additionally, Lee and Kim (2014) found that Korean boys tended to experience a faster decrease in math interest than girls, leading to a smaller gender gap from 7th to 11th grade. Similarly, King and McInerney (2014a, b) indicated that Hong Kong girls experienced a less steep decline in math ability self-concept compared to boys from 7th through 9th grade. Together, these findings suggest that gender differences in math motivation are more salient in younger grades (Fredricks and Eccles 2002; Jacobs et al. 2002).

Decreases in English motivation have also been detected across various samples. For example, Jacobs et al. (2002) found that first-grade girls began school with higher English task values than boys; however, these girls subsequently experienced more rapid declines in value than boys over time. As such, the gender gap narrowed by late elementary school but then slightly increased during high school as girls’ utility values for English increased and boys’ values plateaued. Similarly, Lee and Kim (2014) found that Korean girls’ interest in English decreased more slowly during junior high school and increased at a faster rate during senior high school when compared to boys (see Yeung et al. 2011 for a similar pattern based on Singapore adolescents). Overall, these studies suggest that the gender gap in English motivation became smaller over time.

Recent work has begun to unpack the relations between national-level gender equality indices and math motivation (Else-Quest et al. 2010; Stoet et al. 2016). These studies found that global measures of gender equality (i.e., the Gender Empowerment Measure [GEM] and the Gender Gap Index [GGI]) were significantly associated with gender gaps in math motivation based on the TIMSS2003 and PISA2003 datasets (Klasen 2006). Results disclosed that in nations with greater gender equality, gender differences in ability self-concept, self-efficacy, interest, and utility value were larger than in nations with less gender equality, with results in these nations favoring males (Else-Quest et al. 2010). Correspondingly, Stoet et al. (2016) indicated that countries with higher levels of gender equality exhibit larger gender differences in math anxiety in both the PISA2003 and PISA2012 datasets, with females reporting higher math anxiety than their male counterparts. Despite this contradiction, there is no evidence that gender equality at the national level is linked to gender equality in math motivation. Although East Asian societies have lower levels of gender egalitarianism than Western societies, there are no significant gender differences in math self-concept and interest between Western and East Asia countries (Mullis et al. 2016; OECD 2013; Stoet et al. 2016). Indeed, the latest TIMSS2015 report (Mullis et al. 2016) showed that eighth-grade boys and girls had similar levels of math self-concept and interest in both East Asian (e.g., Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan) and Western countries (e.g., the U.S., England, Australia, New Zealand).

Summary

Gender differences are salient in the development of ability self-concept and task values. Research across both Western and East Asian countries has suggested that male students have greater motivational beliefs in math, whereas female students have greater motivational beliefs in verbal domains. Despite gendered patterns in motivational beliefs that remain somewhat consistent across countries, it is not necessarily the case that gender gaps in math performance favoring male students are prevalent across both countries. In the highest performing countries in East Asia, female students outperform their Western counterparts, demonstrating equal or superior performance to their male counterparts. Future research is needed to better understand the cultural factors that influence gender differences in math performance and motivational beliefs.

Discussion

Motivation is an increasingly important determinant of academic learning, educational choices, and career decisions during adolescence and early adulthood. Recent intervention research has suggested that motivation is malleable; thus, it can be successfully targeted and improved via training and instruction (Hulleman et al. 2010; Rosenzweig and Wigfield 2017). While motivational beliefs drawn from EVT have been widely examined across Western populations, recent work has examined the universality versus cultural specificity of motivation constructs across countries or diverse cultures (Guo et al. 2016). Much can be gleaned from the existing cross-country research on the similarities and differences in the development of ability self-concept and interest. What follows is a description of each lesson.

While it appears that declines in math and English motivational beliefs (i.e., ability self-concept and interest) and gender gaps favoring male students in math and female students in verbal ability occur across multiple cultures, it is essential to keep in mind that local context matters. One cannot expect the results of a policy enacted in one country to be duplicated in another, as all countries have their own unique challenges to combating declines in achievement and motivation throughout adolescence. Furthermore, local and regional differences can occur in the quality and rigor of educational systems within a single country. Prejudice and unequal access to resources can also impact motivation, demonstrating how the intersectionality of race, gender, and class can affect educational choices. In other words, because the needs of individuals are so varied, complex, and embedded within culture, a policy or practice that is successful in one country will not necessarily translate well to another.

In addition, it is important to consider the level at which motivation research is measured and analyzed. Self-report surveys vary in the level at which ability self-concept and interest are measured and analyzed (e.g., individual, class, school, regional, or national levels). Data collected at one level may greatly differ from data measured at a different level, potentially exaggerating or overinflating differences across samples if they relied on different measurement levels. For example, the statement, “I am good at math,” may elicit a different response on a Likert-type scale than the statement, “Compared to most other people, I am good at math.” The second statement deliberately asks students to rate their competence against the competence of those around them, while the first does not identify the method through which students are supposed to weigh their abilities. According to the big fish little pond effect model (Marsh 2007), students given the second statement may rate their ability self-concept lower or higher depending on the relative performance of their school-based peers (i.e., turning their comparisons outward). Students given the first statement, may simply rely on their past grades in math and their performance in comparable and contrasting domains (i.e., turning their comparisons inward). Therefore, special attention should be given to the wording of survey items that measure ability self-concept. In addition, girls often have higher motivation in math in gender-stratified countries, potentially because they are comparing their motivation to other girls in their society. In contrast, girls in egalitarian societies compare their performance to both boys and girls (Else-Quest et al. 2010). Analyzing attitudes and motivation in math and English would benefit from establishing the reference group that students use when judging their own abilities.

Furthermore, the meaning of ability self-concepts and task values may differ across countries, obscuring accurate interpretation of the differences in self-report ratings. Van de Vijver and Leung (2001) stressed that preliminary research should be conducted in cross-country studies to ensure that self-report constructs are equivalent across these target countries. Once equivalency is established, true differences in ratings can be examined. This caution is particularly relevant when comparing ability self-concept across individualistic and collectivist cultures. In East Asian countries, cultural norms are more collectivist and focused on maintaining strong social bonds and group harmony. Individuals in these societies may view rating themselves as highly competent in a subject area as boastful or immodest; hence, the practice would be discouraged within the general zeitgeist. Western countries, on the other hand, are more likely to encourage children to emphasize their skills and find ways to effectively stand out from the crowd.

Other research suggests that these differences between Western and East Asian countries may factor into differences with task values. For example, Wigfield et al. (2016) suggest that in collectivist cultures, individuals may assign high utility value to a task if they perceive it to be useful to the success of their family or community. On the contrary, the usefulness of a field in Western countries is closely associated with a person’s future plans. Similarly, in Western countries, the cost of pursuing a field may be viewed in terms of individual costs (e.g., time, money, effort), while East Asian countries may view a field as costly if pursuing it would prove less beneficial or useful to the group. In fact, some researchers have indicated that the problems with response scale differences between East Asian and Western countries may confound interpretation of cross-cultural comparison studies (He and Van de Vijver 2016). They suggest that a more reliable and valid method of making cross-country comparisons is to ask students to evaluate a hypothetical scenario and directly compare cultural differences in responses. Collectively, additional research is needed to determine if expectancies and values are truly perceived and ranked differently across countries.

Study Limitations

While this study exhibits many strengths, some limitations and caveats should be noted. The systematic review findings are mostly based on correlational studies; hence, causality cannot be assumed in the association between student motivation and academic outcomes. Despite a strong theoretical basis for achievement motivation as an antecedent for student outcomes (Wang and Eccles 2013; Wang and Holcombe 2010), there is a need for longitudinal studies that can disentangle any temporal sequencing of these relations. This line of inquiry is critical given that the association between achievement motivation and student outcomes is likely to be bidirectional (Wang and Eccles 2012; Wang and Degol 2014).

An additional caveat involves the generalizability of this systematic review. The sampling methods inhibited the authors’ ability to generalize the findings (Wang et al. 2019). This systematic review focused on peer-reviewed published studies and did not include unpublished literature. It is plausible that studies that failed to find significant associations between achievement motivation and student outcomes were not published. As such, the publication bias against null findings may have influenced the effects and patterns reported in the study. A final issue limiting the generalizability of the study is that the analyses only focused on motivational constructs of expectancy and task values in mathematics and English. Therefore, the results cannot be generalized to other motivational constructs (e.g., goal structure, implicit theory of intelligence) or subject domains (e.g., science).

Future Research

While a growing body of studies have been conducted to better understand developmental and gender differences in achievement and educational decision-making, there are still several limitations that need to be addressed by future research. First, motivational researchers have largely relied on Western-based measures to study student motivation; however, the cultural validity of these instruments has not always been systematically considered. Therefore, future researchers need to develop instruments that are culturally valid and sensitive (King and McInerney 2016). For example, most Western studies on interest assume that individuals pursue a field because it is intrinsically rewarding to them: They enjoy pursuing the field, and they want to spend their personal time engaging with it. In East Asian countries, the decision to pursue a field may be more group-oriented, reflecting less of a personal drive and more of a desire to pursue work that is meaningful or useful to the family. Consequently, the emphasis on motivation as it is currently defined may rely too heavily on Western assumptions of what makes a field or career valuable to pursue. Likewise, cost has been the least researched among all the EVT factors. This gap in the research presents a problem, as perceptions of cost may also vary by cultural expectations (e.g., personal cost to student versus cost to family as a whole). More research is needed to better understand how cost is conceptualized across cultures.

In addition, the assumption that high extremes on Likert-type scales represent the most positive or desirable responses on measures of motivation largely conforms to Western norms and values. In East Asian countries, modesty and humility are more valued traits, indicating that answers falling in the mid-range of response scales would be perceived as more adaptive and desirable (King and McInerney 2016). These cultural differences in response patterns need to be considered in all research examining cross-country differences in self-reports of motivation. It would be informative to use a variety of complementary methods, such as implicit methods, behavior observations, and parent and teacher reports, to replicate key findings in EVT research.

Third, intervention research has indicated that students from Western and East Asian countries view utility values differently in terms of their short- and long-term goals. Indeed, Western students are more likely to connect utility values to more current or proximal goals (e.g., solving a problem) and respond more strongly to interventions that focus on proximal goals, while East Asian students are more likely to link utility values to long-term or distal goals (e.g., career relevance) and respond more strongly to interventions that focus on these long-term goals (Harackiewicz et al. 2014; Lazowski and Hulleman 2016; Shechter et al. 2011). Given these differences, researchers should examine whether these stark differences in goal-orientation have implications on career decisions across countries. Domain specificity in utility value may also be worth examining across countries.

Fourth, while EVT is well-suited for cross-country investigations, very little cross-country work has been done, and the work that has been completed has not been able to gather nationally representative samples (Wigfield et al. 2016). Empirical EVT studies based on Western countries (usually America) have dominated the literature on academic motivation. This overrepresentation creates a problem in that not only are East Asian countries understudied, but when they are researched, Western assumptions about motivational drives are also applied to these contexts. As a possible next step, future researchers should conduct qualitative studies to determine if students’ definitions of academic self-concept and task values differ across countries. For example, researchers could ask East Asian and Western students if a person who self-identifies as highly skilled in math is a good thing or if choosing to pursue a career due to high personal interest is a priority in career decision-making.

Fifth, there is a lack of studies examining heterogeneity in motivational trajectories throughout the school years (Wang et al. 2017a, b). Most extant research has examined average trends in a sample, masking individual differences in developmental trends. Only a few studies have examined heterogeneity in math and English self-concept and interest, and all of these studies have utilized Western samples. For example, a study on literacy motivation identified seven groups with unique developmental trajectories, and though all seven groups experienced declines in literacy motivation from 1st through 12th grade, rates of decline differed across groups (Archambault et al. 2010). Future research is needed to better understand which students in each country or culture are at increased risk for experiencing motivational declines throughout adolescence.

A final limitation to the current literature is the overemphasis on the use of cross-country work on motivation to establish universal patterns across countries (i.e., etic findings) rather than focus on culturally specific (i.e., emic) findings. That is, the prevailing interest is typically to identify if a theory or guiding framework is universal (i.e., consistent across all groups, settings, and time periods) rather than to adapt or revise a theory or framework to fit a specific culture (King et al. 2018). Identifying unique challenges and strengths across specific cultures can advance and streamline efforts to specifically focus on the improvement of motivational outcomes for individual students (King et al. 2018). For example, a closer examination of cultural differences across Western and East Asian countries may also explain gender differences in academic performance and motivation. In East Asian countries, girls have higher math achievement than girls in Western countries. This pattern could be due to a high value placed on math and science in East Asian countries and a potential desire for girls to succeed in a field that the group (e.g., family, school, country) highly emphasizes. In Western countries, math and science have been marketed as fields that are largely incompatible with women’s more people-oriented, altruistic personal interests and goals (Diekman et al. 2015). Applying a different cultural lens may help us to better understand why differences or similarities between countries occur, without simply assessing if a theory or model is universal.

Conclusion

Motivation is an important factor in the career decision-making process for adolescents and young adults, as they use their expectancies for success and task values to determine which fields or academic majors to pursue (Wang and Hofkens 2019). While ability self-concepts are for achievement and task values are important for college major and career decisions, much of the research on expectancy-value theory has been validated among Western countries, leaving a dearth of knowledge as to how expectancy-value theory functions in more collectivist cultures where personal interests are less emphasized in favor of the desires of the in-group (e.g., East Asia).

Despite expectancy-value theory being examined less frequently among East Asian countries, the existing literature is clear: For both Western and East Asian samples, ability self-concepts and task values are associated with achievement and career decisions. Gender differences are also quite consistent across countries, with male students demonstrating a slight motivational edge in mathematics and female students holding a slight motivational edge in reading and English. However, key country differences in motivation do exist, and the accurate measurement of motivation across countries or cultures relies upon a strong theoretical and empirical understanding of the meaningful differences in self-perceptions of ability and task values. For example, do we need to adjust our perception of what a high self-concept is when East Asian students are much more likely to select responses in the middle of a scale, as opposed to Western students who are more likely to choose the extremes? Developing culturally sensitive, ecologically valid measurement tools while simultaneously fine-tuning the current interpretations of motivation to fit cultural norms will profoundly advance the field’s understanding of how motivation operates as a catalyst for learning across diverse settings.

Understanding how cultural values, gender norms and expectations, and educational systems operate both across and within different countries is necessary to design and implement educational interventions that are effective at reducing adolescent declines in motivation. As differences in ability self-concept and task values have been noted across Western and East Asian countries, interventions that effectively promote growth in ability self-concept or task values in Western countries may be less successful in East Asian countries and vice versa. It is the role, then, of current and future motivation researchers to find and apply an appropriate merger of a universally relevant, generalizable concept of motivation with culturally and ecologically specific applications, strategies, and implications.