Use discount code: LoveMyDaddy and get 19% OFF your order! Hurry up! Get your Father’s Day Gift from ExclusivePapers.com!
This topic on the effect of beliefs and behavior on performance is interesting as it gives chance to put to test students from virtually anywhere in the world. Further, a small number of researches have been conducted to study this issue. It is worth noting that people suppose that behaviors and beliefs affect the performance. Lack of vision is the first of the earlier research findings. Students believe that lack of clear articulated image of their intended success and lack of utilization of student resources are the behaviors that greatly affect their performance. Every institution has an academic knowledge center where its students get faculty and peer tutoring free of charge. Most students fail to utilize such facilities, and this behavior impacts their performance. I agree with students’ view that their beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors significantly impact their academic performance. I think it is important to look at the relationship between study behavior and study beliefs since many people desire to learn more about a probable correlation between the two.
I also expect to establish a correlation between belief and behavior. I believe that beliefs affect behavior. This is my hypothesis. The reason is that people do not collect information from the external environment to form fresh beliefs. Instead, they gather fresh information to support their existing beliefs. This implies that, for instance, believing that Mr. X is ignorant will result in altering his behavior in a way that he will only pay attention to his mistakes, while ignoring his good deeds. I presume that not only do beliefs affect someone’s behavior, but they further affect their lives and shape their entire reality.
Numbers and Demographics
Buy Belief and Behavior Correlations essay paper online
Methods and Procedures
From 37 people who participated in a study, all participants who started the survey completed it. The participant group was fairly mixed. Participants had a mean age of 22.53 rounded to 22 years and a standard deviation of (6.78), but they ranged in age from 17 to 49 years. There was an uneven number of men: there were 19 males and 18 females of the 37 respondents, men’s share was 51.35 % compared to women’s 48.65 %. Participants were of 6 different nationalities, which included half casts. Of our sample, the bigger part was represented by Germans and Spaniards. Given this diversity, it is not surprising that all participants reported their English comprehension to be 64 % with 24 % listing English speakers, 9 of the respondents. The group was fairly diverse in educational background as well. Over half of the sample had at least a bachelors’ degree or higher.
Received comments on what respondents thought they should have done to improve their performance related to the way they study, more than half of these participants believed that they had a role to play in studies just before performance. This indicates that they do appreciate that their behavior affects their performance. However, a small number of these respondents considered that nothing could be done to alter the situation. Their performance did not depend on change of their behavior before exams.
Asked about where they thought they ranked in their classes, more than half of respondents believed that they were either in the middle of the class or in 25% of the class, while the rest were either in 5% of their class or above the middle.
Computation of the Composite Score
The study relied on the regression-weighted method, where each item was weighted according to its factor loading. Scores that were regression-weighted were standardized (to a averages of 0 and standard deviation of 1) in some situations. They were applicable when comparing the means of 2 or more composite scores.
The variables under study were belief and behavior. Belief was an independent variable, and behavior was dependent variable. For this correlation study, the relationship between study behaviors, beliefs about studying, and people’s grades was studied. Specifically, the goal was to test whether there was a correlation between people’s performance and beliefs about studying under pressure and their final grades. To answer this question, a survey including a total of 19 questions was designed. All questions were proofread to minimize experimental error and to ensure that they did not contain any imprecise language or too technical terms. Any loaded double-barreled categories.
The first category consisted of questions related to study behavior of each individual. The second category asked about individuals’ beliefs about their studying. The third category was about their grades. For the first category, three questions were asked to evaluate person's study behavior. The first multiple choice question was "How much time before an exam do you start studying?" For this question there were 5 possible answers, from which they had to choose one. These possible answers were: the day of the exam, the day before, 2-3 days before, 1 week before, and more than 1 week before. The other two questions asked individuals to indicate how much they agreed with the statements “I study a little bit each day to prepare for an upcoming exam” and “I wait till a day before the exams and then study nonstop until I actually take the exam". For these statement, a Likert-type scale was used where 1 stood for "not like me" and 5 for "totally/completely like me".
In the second category, five questions were used to measure individual's beliefs about their study behavior. These questions were: When do you study best for an exam? Do you think the quality of your studying improves the closer the exam date? How organized do you consider yourself to be? I believe my grades would be better if I started studying for an exam earlier. Do you study better under pressure?
For the first four questions, a Likert-type scale was used. The first question ''When do you study best for the exam?" was anchored with 1 (Immediately before the exam) and 5 (far in advance before the exam). The second question ''Do you think the quality of your studying improves the closer the exam date?'' had a 1 for "No" and 5 for "Yes". The Likert scale for the third question ''How organized do you consider yourself to be?'' had a 1 for "Completely disorganized" and a 5 for "Completely organized". Finally the last statement of this four ''I believe my grades would be better if I started studying for an exam earlier" had a 1 for "Completely disagree" and a 5 for "Completely agree". Finally, the last question ''Do you study better under pressure?'' was designed to provide participants not with a Likert scale, but with four possible answers to choose from: always, sometimes, it doesn't make a difference, never.
For the third category, three questions were asked to measure grades. These questions were: "My overall grade point average is typically...", "Compared to my peers, academically I am...", "How happy are you with your grades?" For the first question, participants had to choose the category that best reflected their overall grades from 9-10, 8-8.9, 7-7.9, 6-6.9, 5-5.9, 4-4.9, 3-3.0, 0-2.9. For the second question, participants had to choose the category that best reflected their position in class from: top 5% of my class, top 25% of my class, right in the middle, bottom 25% of my class, bottom 5% of my class.
For the last question a Likert-type scale was used anchored with 1 (extremely unhappy) or 5 (extremely happy) about their grades. By taking a closer look at the method above, it can be said that the items have a good structure and that most of them are based on scales (e.g. how organized consider herself/himself to be).
These scales are reliable. They perfectly served their purpose. Moreover, survey questions were of high quality. They flowed logically from previous questions, they did not presuppose a certain state, they provided the required variability of responses, they had mutually exclusive options, they accommodated all possible responses, they asked for answers only on a single dimension, and they evoked the truth.
The above items created had high face and content validity. This is the reason they helped achieve the objective for which they were designed and chosen.
The link to the questionnaire was sent to participants via email or Facebook for them to fill it out. Each of these questions was coded using a 5-point Likert scale anchored with 1 (not at all) and 5 (all the time). The questionnaire’s instructions were as follows:
"I invite you to participate in the following survey (a project for our research methods class). The survey should take you roughly 10 minutes to complete (max 15 minutes). All data remains anonymous and will only be used for teaching purposes. Please read the following permission form. If you agree to participate, please choose "accept" as your answer to the first question. Thank you!"
Honesty and accuracy were highly advocated; the exercise was voluntary. Respondents were notified that the purpose of the survey was to add up to the existing knowledge base. As this data was collected electronically, the sampling method indicates a mixture of the convenience and the snowball sampling procedures. This is because Facebook friends of the researcher promoted the survey through publishing the link in their Facebook profiles and walls.
The study examined the influence of individuals' input or beliefs on their behavior and consequent performance in education. Table 4 indicates the means and standard deviations for the two measures on the survey. In this study’s sample, the mean for the first composite value (behavior) was M=3.03 (SD=0.8). The values were computed using a scale from 1 to 5. A score of 1 indicated that respondents’ performance was least or not affected by belief and behavior, whereas a score of 5 indicated that respondent’s performance was affected by belief and behavior. The mean for the first composite value was M=3.45 (SD=0.6). Again, a scale from 1 to 5 was used. In this case, score of 1 indicated that the respondent was least affected by behavior or belief, whereas 5 indicated otherwise for the participant. Below, the researchers tested to see whether there was a significant relationship between these observed trends.
Table 4 indicates the relationship existing between behavior (variable 1) and beliefs about the study behavior (variable 2) if their performance was affected by belief and behavior current correlation in the present, r (37) p<0.17. Hence the sample size was 37 respondents. Correlation coefficient was 0, which implied that the relationship is not significant. This means that there exists no relationship between the 2 variables.
Review of Findings
This studyintended to evaluate the relationships existing between student's attitudes or beliefs and behavior. 5 -item scales were developed. They were used to find out about beliefs, behavior, experiences, and to evaluate beliefs about the importance or behavior towards academic performance. A 2-way analysis of variance (behavior × beliefs) was used with the behavior or attitude towards exams, herein, used as the dependent entity. Gender also had a notable effect on attitudes, where females displayed more positive behavior than their males counterparts. Prior higher academic encounters were also significant predictors of behavior. Those who had high scores indicated more positive attitudes towards education in comparison to those who scored lower on questions. Basing on the review of earlier research, the finding in this paper was surprising. However, it is evident that lower achieving respondents might perceive that there is a higher competitive edge from experiences compared to the already highly educated students. The analysis also shows that beliefs have a positive correlation with respondents’ behavior. Those who believed educational level was significant had more positive behavior. The proposition for theories, research, procedure, and practice are well presented in this paper.
Results versus Hypotheses
Results indicate that beliefs, behavior, and performance are relatively fixed and are associated with the principles that performance is comparatively stable and that intelligence is comprehensive in its long-term effects on performance. These beliefs were different from the one that efforts in behavior have positive effects on performance and intelligence. Respondent’s beliefs that were indicated to affect presentation were disapprovingly associated with positive achievement, but the analysis provided a modest support of the earlier hypothesis that effects of such beliefs might be mediated by accompanying and performance objective orientated superficial learning strategies.
Possible Interpretation of the Results
The results from the above research were derived by using electronic means, Facebook, and e-mail. Proper, simple, and clear instructions were provided to eliminate room for participant's confusion. This ensured that data collected is to be trusted. Use of questions that had their characteristics related to the two variables under consideration made it easy to draw conclusion. The right choice of data collection techniques and methods of analysis to examine the relationship had a major role in ensuring accurate data records and determination of correlation coefficients. It would be right to conclude that the research met its purpose.
Possible Data Insignificance
I think I did not find a significant result following possible calculation error, which would imply that a larger section of the remaining data was also affected, and consequently clouding the judgment of actual results. This means that from the data I can conclude that behavior does not create beliefs until a follow up action is taken in the research to eliminate chances of indisposed errors.
Although there might be a slight relationship between the two variables, saying that one does not influence the other should also be considered significant. This finding can be tested by future researches that would study a larger group of respondents. The research, however, might have had a limitation. It is possible that some data provided by respondents may have been incorrect, thus increasing the possibility of error.