Research quality moderates the relationship between student motivation and academic performance in online and blended courses: A meta-analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v30iSI2.5822Keywords:
meta-analysis, online learning, blended learning, motivation, research qualityAbstract
Prior meta-analytic work suggests the relationship between student motivation and academic performance among in-person learners is strong; however, evidence is weaker for college students learning in online, digital, and distance education (ODDE). This could be due to a variety of factors, including the rigor and quality of existing research, which has not been systematically accounted for in (ODDE) motivation reviews since 2008. The primary objective of this expanded meta-analytic review was to examine measurement quality and methodological quality first as moderators and then as adjustments in exploring the relationships between motivational constructs or synchronicity and academic performance in ODDE courses. Informed by DISCAR and adapted from PRISMA, we searched nine databases of studies published between 1990 and 2025 and conducted a secondary search of references, ultimately analyzing 64 studies and 117 outcomes that met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Both measurement quality and methodological quality were moderators of the relationship between student motivation and academic performance in online and blended courses. Adjusting for significant quality differences, overall, modest correlation values (r = 0.14) overestimated adjusted relationships (radj = 0.10). Despite challenges with some instances of missing data and low interrater reliability, these results indicate that motivational factors related to student success may be overstated when research quality is taken into account. Variations were found in both motivational constructs as well as synchronicity, suggesting that what is measured and how learners interact make a difference. These results have implications for future ODDE research, pedagogical designers, and policymakers.
References
Alkış, N., & Temizel, T. T. (2018). The impact of motivation and personality on academic performance in online and blended learning environments. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(3), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.201807_21(3).0004
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 260–267. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.3.260
Bahçekapili, E., & Karaman, S. (2020). A path analysis of five-factor personality traits, self-efficacy, academic locus of control and academic achievement among online students. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 12(2), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2020.12.010
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. in f. pajares & t. urdan (eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (Vol. 5, pp. 307–337). Information Age Publishing.
Bardach, L., Oczlon, S., Pietschnig, J., & Lüftenegger, M. (2020). Has achievement goal theory been right? a meta-analysis of the relation between goal structures and personal achievement goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(6), 1197–1220. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000419
Bawa, P. (2016). Retention in online courses: Exploring issues and solutions—a literature review. SAGE Open, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015621777
Bay, J. (2026, January 15). Distance Education Enrollment Surges Nationwide. Inside Higher Education. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/student-success/academic-life/2026/01/15/distance-education-enrollment-surges-nationwide
Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309333844
Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Wade, A., Borokhovski, E., & Lou, Y. (2004, October 19–23). The effects of synchronous and asynchronous distance education: A meta-analytical assessment of Simonson’s “equivalency theory” [Conference paper]. 27th Annual Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Chicago, IL, United States. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED485078
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021). Introduction to Meta-Analysis (2nd ed.). Wiley.
Chang, C.-C., Yen, W.-H., Liu, S.-C., & Kuo, C.-T. (2026). Learning presence in the revised community of inquiry framework: A systematic review of empirical research (2010–2024). The Internet and Higher Education, 68, 101058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2025.101058
Cho, M. H., & Summers, J. (2012). Factor validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ) in asynchronous online learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 23(1), 5-28.
Cicchetti, D. V., & Feinstein, A. R. (1990). High agreement but low kappa: Ii. resolving the paradoxes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 43(6), 551–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(90)90159-m
de Araujo, J., Gomes, C. M. A., & Jelihovschi, E. G. (2023). The factor structure of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ): New methodological approaches and evidence. Psicologia, Reflexao e Critica: Revista Semestral Do Departamento de Psicologia Da UFRGS, 36(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-023-00280-0
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2020). From expectancy-value theory to situated expectancy-value theory: A developmental, social cognitive, and sociocultural perspective on motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101859
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501–519. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.3.501
Fromm, Y. M., Martin, F., Gezer, T., & Ifenthaler, D. (2025). Best practices for conducting systematic reviews: Perspectives of experienced systematic review researchers in educational sciences. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 30(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-025-09819-9
Gardner, A., Ibrahim, M., Karamarkovich, S., Holsapple, M., & Shapiro, D. (2024). PDP insights: Early indicators of timely completers. in National Student Clearinghouse. National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED673395
Goulão, M. (2014). The relationship between self-efficacy and academic achievement in adults’ learners. Athens Journal of Education, 1, 237–246. https://doi.org/10.30958/aje.1-3-4
Hedges, L. V., Tipton, E., & Johnson, M. C. (2010). Robust variance estimation in meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Research Synthesis Methods, 1(1), 39–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.5
Hilpert, J. C., Stempien, J., van der Hoeven Kraft, K. J., & Husman, J. (2013). Evidence for the latent factor structure of the MSLQ: A new conceptualization of an established questionnaire. SAGE Open, 3(4), 2158244013510305. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013510305
Hodges, C. B. (2008). Self-efficacy, motivational email, and achievement in an asynchronous math course. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 27(3), 265–285.
Honicke, T., Broadbent, J., & Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. (2020). Learner self-efficacy, goal orientation, and academic achievement: Exploring mediating and moderating relationships. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(4), 689–703. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1685941
Howard, J. L., Bureau, J., Guay, F., Chong, J. X. Y., & Ryan, R. M. (2021). Student motivation and associated outcomes: A meta-analysis from self-determination theory. Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 16(6), 1300–1323. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966789
Huang, C. (2012). Discriminant and criterion-related validity of achievement goals in predicting academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 48–73. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026223
Huang, L.-F., Wu, T.-Y., Hou, S.-H., & Horng, R.-Y. (2012). Effects of feedback type, problem presentation, and practice on problem solving. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 43(4), 855–874.
Hulleman, C.S., Barron, K.E., Kosovich, J.J., Lazowski, R.A. (2016). Student Motivation: Current Theories, Constructs, and Interventions Within an Expectancy-Value Framework. In: Lipnevich, A., Preckel, F., Roberts, R. (eds) Psychosocial Skills and School Systems in the 21st Century. The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28606-8_10
Hulleman, C. S., Schrager, S. M., Bodmann, S. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). A Meta-Analytic review of achievement goal measures: Different labels for the same constructs or different constructs with similar labels? Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 422–449. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018947
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings. Sage Publications.
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2007). Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Jacobsen, L. J. (2025). ACCESS: A Framework for Student Success. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/opinion/views/2025/08/06/framework-organizing-student-success-efforts-opinion
Johnson, N., Seaman, J., & Poulin, R. (2022). Defining different modes of learning: Resolving confusion and contention through consensus. Online Learning, 26(3). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i3.3565
Joo, Y. J., Lim, K. Y., & Kim, J. (2013). Locus of control, self-efficacy, and task value as predictors of learning outcome in an online university context. Computers & Education, 62, 149–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.027
Katrak, P., Bialocerkowski, A. E., Massy-Westropp, N., Kumar, S., & Grimmer, K. A. (2004). A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 4, 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-4-22
Kebritchi, M., Lipschuetz, A., & Santiague, L. (2017). Issues and challenges for teaching successful online courses in higher education: A literature review. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 46(1), 4–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239516661713
Kim, J.-Y. (2012). A study on learners’ perceptional typology and relationships among the learner’s types, characteristics, and academic achievement in a blended E-Education environment. Computers & Education, 59(2), 304–315.
Krebs-Lazendic, L., Dello Stritto, M. E., & Park, E. (2026). A critical review of research on synchronous instructor presence in online learning: Elusive evidence and mixed results. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 27(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRDE-09-2025-0016
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research, 30(3), 411–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2004.tb00738.x
Lazowski, R. A., & Hulleman, C. S. (2016). Motivation interventions in education: A Meta-Analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 602–640. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315617832
Lee, K. (2017). Rethinking the ACCESSibility of online higher education: A historical review. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.01.001
Lipsey, M., & Wilson, D. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Sage.
Liu, C., Sands-Meyer, S., & Audran, J. (2019). The effectiveness of the student response system (SRS) in english grammar learning in a flipped english as a foreign language (EFL) class. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1178–1191.
Lucas, M., & Vicente, P. N. (2023). A double-edged sword: Teachers’ perceptions of the benefits and challenges of online teaching and learning in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 28(5), 5083–5103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11363-3
Macnamara, B. N., & Burgoyne, A. P. (2023). Do growth mindset interventions impact students’ academic achievement? a systematic review and meta-analysis with recommendations for best practices. Psychological Bulletin, 149(3–4), 133–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000352
Mahmud, M., Freeman, B., & Abu Bakar, M. (2022). Technology in education: Efficacies and outcomes of different delivery methods. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 19(1), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-01-2021-0021
Martin, F., Wu, T., Wan, L., & Xie, K. (2022). A Meta-Analysis on the Community of Inquiry Presences and Learning Outcomes in Online and Blended Learning Environments. Online Learning (Newburyport, Mass.), 26(1), 325. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i1.2604
Martin, F., Tutty, J. I., & Su, Y. (2010). Influence of learning management systems self-efficacy on e-learning performance. Journal on School Educational Technology, 5(3), 26–35.
Marzi, G., Balzano, M., & Marchiori, D. (2024). K-Alpha calculator–Krippendorff’s alpha calculator: A user-friendly tool for computing Krippendorff’s alpha inter-rater reliability coefficient. MethodsX, 12, 102545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2023.102545
McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276–282.
McPhaul-Moore, E. (2013). Predictors of online learning success in a rural community college [doctoral dissertation, northcentral university]. in ProQuest LLC. https://www.proquest.com/docview/1444627614
Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659
Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1991). Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: A Meta-Analytic investigation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(1), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.38.1.30
National Center for Education Statistics. (2024). College Enrollment Rates (Condition of Education). Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cpb
Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z., & Elmagarmid, A. (2016). Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Systematic reviews, 5(1), 210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinnrdd, L.A., Stewart, L.A., Thomas, J., Tricco, A.C., Welch, V.A., Whiting, P., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Perkowski, J. (2013). The role of gender in distance learning: A Meta-Analytic review of gender differences in academic performance and self-efficacy in distance learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 41(3), 267–278. https://doi.org/10.2190/ET.41.3.e
Pintrich, P. R. (1991). A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED338122
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(3), 801–813. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164493053003024
Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 353–387. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026838
Rosella, L., Bowman, C., Pach, B., Morgan, S., Fitzpatrick, T., & Goel, V. (2016). The development and validation of a meta-tool for quality appraisal of public health evidence: Meta quality appraisal tool (MetaQAT). Public Health, 136, 57–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2015.10.027
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860
Savoji, A. P. (2013). Motivational strategies and academic achievement in traditional and virtual university students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 84, 1015–1020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.691
Senko, C., & Dawson, B. (2017). Performance-approach goal effects depend on how they are defined: Meta-Analytic evidence from multiple educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(4), 574–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000160
Shea, B. J., Grimshaw, J. M., Wells, G. A., Boers, M., Andersson, N., Hamel, C., Porter, A. C., Tugwell, P., Moher, D., & Bouter, L. M. (2007). Development of AMSTAR: A measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 7, 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-7-10
Shea, P., Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2022). Building bridges to advance the community of inquiry framework for online learning. Educational Psychologist, 57(3), 148–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2022.2089989
Stephen, J. S., Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J., & Dubay, C. (2020). Persistence model of non-traditional online learners: Self-efficacy, self-regulation, and self-direction. American Journal of Distance Education, 34(4), 306–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2020.1745619
Sterne, J. A. C., Savović, J., Page, M. J., Elbers, R. G., Blencowe, N. S., Boutron, I., Cates, C. J., Cheng, H.-Y., Corbett, M. S., Eldridge, S. M., Emberson, J. R., Hernán, M. A., Hopewell, S., Hróbjartsson, A., Junqueira, D. R., Jüni, P., Kirkham, J. J., Lasserson, T., Li, T., … Higgins, J. P. T. (2019). RoB 2: A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ, 366, l4898. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4898
Storrings, D. (2005). Attrition in distance education: A meta-analysis. Instructional Design, Development and Evaluation - Dissertations. https://surface.syr.edu/idde_etd/8
Theobald, M. (2021). Self-regulated learning training programs enhance university students’ academic performance, self-regulated learning strategies, and motivation: A meta-analysis. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 66, 101976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.101976
Tladi, L. S. (2017). Perceived ability and success: Which self-efficacy measures matter? a distance learning perspective. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 32(3), 243–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2017.1356711
Torun, E. D. (2020). Online distance learning in higher education: E-learning readiness as a predictor of academic achievement. Open Praxis, 12(2), 191–208. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.352722164544178
Walker, A., Aguiar, N. R., Soicher, R., Kuo, Y.-C., & Resig, J. (2024). Exploring the relationships between motivation and academic performance among online and blended learners: A Meta-Analytic review. Online Learning, 28(4). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i4.4602
Wang, A. Y., & Newlin, M. H. (2000). Characteristics of students who enroll and succeed in psychology web-based classes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 137–143. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.1.137
Wang, L. (2022). Student Intrinsic Motivation for Online Creative Idea Generation: Mediating Effects of Student Online Learning Engagement and Moderating Effects of Teacher Emotional Support. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 954216. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.954216
Warren, L., Reilly, D., Herdan, A., & Lin, Y. (2020). Self-efficacy, performance and the role of blended learning. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 13(1), 98–111. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-08-2019-0210
Weiner, B. (2010). The development of an attribution-based theory of motivation: A history of ideas. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 28–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903433596
West, R. E., & Martin, F. (2024). What type of paper are you writing? a taxonomy of review and theory scholarship distinguished by their summary and advocacy arguments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72(5), 2443–2476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10233-0
Whiting, P., Savović, J., Higgins, J. P. T., Caldwell, D. M., Reeves, B. C., Shea, B., Davies, P., Kleijnen, J., & Churchill, R. (2016). ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 69, 225–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.06.005
Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Lai, B. Y. C., & Tan, H. S. (2005). What makes the difference? a practical analysis of research on the effectiveness of distance education. Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1836–1884. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00544.x
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Andrew Walker, Naomi R. Aguiar, Kaelynn Loveless, Yu-Chun Kuo, Raechel Soicher, Jessica Resig
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
