A Dataset for L2 Learners’ Motivational Profiles: A Self-determination Theory Perspective

Repository location

https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28771193.v3

Context

This dataset is part of a broader quantitative inquiry aimed at illuminating the motivational profiles of foreign or second language (L2) learners through the lens of the self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985), a framework that continues to shape scholarly discourse on educational motivation and achievement (Li et al., 2023). The SDT delineates motivation along a continuum from amotivation to controlled and ultimately autonomous motivation, each reflecting varying degrees of volition and psychological integration (Deci & Ryan, 2008; Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Within the context of second language acquisition, at one end of the continuum, amotivation denotes a psychological state characterized by a complete lack of intent to engage, often rooted in perceived incompetence or a disconnection between effort and outcome (Ratelle et al., 2007; Sumakul & Hamied, 2023; Wang & Liu, 2022). Crucially, this condition is distinguishable from demotivation, which involves specific negative stimuli, as amotivation signifies a fundamental absence of drive (Gearing, 2023), often accompanied by emotional disengagement and minimal exertion (Lucas et al., 2016). Controlled motivation, conversely, emerges from regulatory mechanisms driven by external contingencies (external regulation) or internalized pressures, such as guilt or obligation (introjected regulation) (Ryan & Deci, 2017). External regulation pertains to learners’ participation in language activities prompted by perceived external demands or anticipated repercussions, like social expectations or evaluative pressures (Guay, 2022). In contrast, introjected regulation, although partially internalized, remains contingent on extrinsic influences, compelling learners to act under the weight of internalized guilt or an acute need to fulfill others’ expectations (Urhahne & Wijnia, 2023). While these regulatory orientations may facilitate provisional compliance and surface-level task engagement, their efficacy tends to be ephemeral, often failing to engender the deep-seated cognitive involvement and sustained learning essential for long-term academic development. At the opposite end of the spectrum lies autonomous motivation, which materializes when learners immerse themselves in activities perceived to be congruent with their self-concept, propelled by intrinsically rooted or personally valorized imperatives (Lou et al., 2018). Representing the highest level of self-determination (Takahashi & Im, 2020), this form of motivation is consistently associated with elevated engagement, persistence, and achievement, fostering an instrumental foundation for lifelong learning (Dincer & Yeşilyurt, 2017). It includes intrinsic motivation, marked by genuine interest and enjoyment, as well as identified regulation, where learners internalize the value of a task in alignment with their personal goals (De Bilde et al., 2011). In comparison, while identified regulation is less self-determined than intrinsic motivation, it still reflects a significant degree of personal commitment and autonomous choice (Komiyama & McMorris, 2017; Noels et al., 2019).

Learner motivation is not monolithic; rather, it can manifest in complex forms, moving beyond the simplistic dichotomy of intrinsic and extrinsic configurations. Hence, this dataset holds significant promise for dissecting motivational diversity by capturing learners’ motivational profiles along the SDT continuum. Such profiling can contribute meaningfully to the refinement of pedagogical strategies aiming at fostering environments conducive to robust, self-determined motivation.

Steps

A questionnaire was carefully developed, drawing on previously established instruments, to capture the multifaceted dimensions of L2 motivation aligned with the SDT. The final instrument comprised five distinct scales, each reflecting a specific regulatory type. Four of these, including intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, introjected regulation, and external regulation, were adopted from the validated measures of Takahashi and Im (2020), with each scale consisting of five items. The amotivation scale, comprising four items, was developed by adapting three items from Ratelle et al. (2007), whose seminal work examined general academic motivation among high school students, and one item from Dybowski and Harendza (2015), originally formulated to assess teaching motivation in medical education. To ensure domain specificity and contextual relevance for English language learning, all items were carefully reworded to reflect amotivation in the L2 context. For instance, the original item “Honestly, I don’t know. I really feel that I am wasting my time in school” was revised to “Honestly, I don’t know. I feel that I am wasting my time in school studying English,” and “I teach although I hardly ever feel like doing it” was rephrased as “I study English at school although I hardly feel like doing it.” The adaptation process prioritized conceptual fidelity, semantic equivalence, and linguistic clarity. Consequently, a 24-item composite measure was crafted, with all items rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 “strongly disagree” to 5 “strongly agree”. To ensure content validity, two TESOL experts were invited to evaluate the instrument, resulting in minor lexical adjustments to enhance the clarity of the items. Subsequently, the questionnaire was piloted with 44 participants, all of whom were subsequently excluded to maintain the integrity of the sample. Following the finalization of the questionnaire, the items were translated into Vietnamese to facilitate comprehension and ensure linguistic accessibility during data collection. The administration of the instrument took place during scheduled class hours across varied cohorts of English majors, with the support of their course instructors. Participants completed the questionnaire using a paper-and-pencil format in a controlled classroom setting. Prior to participation, informed consent was obtained from all individuals, underscoring the voluntary nature of their involvement and their right to withdraw at any time without consequence. In total, 239 responses were collected, which together constituted the dataset.

Participants

The participants included undergraduate English majors at a university in the Mekong Delta region of Vietnam. Recruitment was conducted through convenience sampling, a non-probability sampling technique in which individuals are selected based on their availability and logistical accessibility (Farrokhi & Mahmoudi-Hamidabad, 2012). The sample consisted of 28.9% males (N = 69) and 71.1% females (N = 170), with ages ranging from 19 to 23 years (M = 20.83, SD = 1.23). Regarding academic standing, the largest proportion consisted of fourth-year students, accounting for 43.5% (N = 104). The remaining students were relatively evenly distributed across the earlier academic years, with 22.6% (N = 54) in their first year, 16.3% (N = 39) in their second year, and 17.6% (N = 42) in their third year. All participants reported having accumulated at least ten years of English language learning experience, indicating a relatively homogeneous background in terms of prior language exposure.

Quality control

To rigorously evaluate the psychometric soundness of the motivational constructs, both reliability and factor analytic procedures were conducted.

Repository name

Figshare

Object name

Dataset_L2 Motivational Profiles.sav

Dataset_L2 Motivational Profiles.xlsx

Format names and versions

.sav

.xlsx

Creation dates

From 2025-03-17 to 2025-04-10

Dataset creators

Duong Minh Tuan

Nguyen Xuan Dat

Language

All the variable names in the dataset are in English.

License

CC BY 4.0

Publication date

The latest version of the dataset was published on Figshare on 28 June 2025.