Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Wiley Open Access Collection logoLink to Wiley Open Access Collection
. 2025 Jun 18;97(7):1869–1881. doi: 10.1002/jad.70008

Extracurricular Activities—Extra Beneficial: The Role of Motivation for Extracurricular Activities on Outcomes in High‐School Students

Jérémie Verner‐Filion 1,✉, Anne C Holding 2,3, Isabelle Gingras 3, Richard Koestner 3
PMCID: PMC12493012  PMID: 40533929

ABSTRACT

Introduction

There is growing interest in the developmental consequences of extracurricular activities. While past research has mostly focused on the direct effect of extracurricular activities on outcomes (Farb and Matjasko 2012; Marsh and Kleitman 2002), the current study used a Self‐Determination Theory (SDT) framework to test a serial mediation model in which self‐determined motivation for extracurricular activities was positively associated with indicators of students' functioning through the mediating role of self‐determined school motivation and psychological need satisfaction in school. Moreover, the current study aimed at testing SDT's claim that psychological need satisfaction is universally applicable across contexts and cultures.

Method

A total of 886 high‐school students (M age = 14.95, SDage = 1.77) from China (n = 267), USA (n = 281), Canada (n = 195), and France (n = 143) completed a questionnaire assessing motivation for extracurricular activity and school‐related variables including motivation, need satisfaction, mood, stress, perceptions of overscheduling, and intentions to dropout. Teacher reports of students' motivation, self‐efficacy, optimism, and missed school days were collected for a subsample of Canadian, American, and French students (n = 219).

Results

Findings of a cross‐sectional mediation model revealed that across cultures, self‐determined motivation for extracurricular activities was positively associated with indicators of academic functioning for student and teacher‐rated outcomes through the mediating effects of self‐determined academic motivation and psychological need satisfaction in school.

Conclusion

These findings underscore the importance of students' perceptions of motivation and psychological need satisfaction in demonstrating how extracurricular activities may be positively related to school functioning across cultures.

Keywords: cross‐cultural, extracurricular activity, motivation, need satisfaction, well‐being

1. Introduction

Stakeholders in the education domain are faced with the challenge of engaging students. This is important because school achievement represents a major developmental indicator toward a productive adulthood—dropping out of school before obtaining a diploma results in undesirable personal, economic, and social consequences (Chapman et al. 2010). There has been growing interest in the role of extracurricular programs for engaging youth, specifically with regard to promoting school achievement and psychological well‐being, as well as preventing school dropout (e.g., Billingsley and Hurd 2019; Denault et al. 2019; Farb and Matjasko 2012; McCabe et al. 2020; Thouin et al. 2022). Extracurricular activities are defined as structured and supervised activities that students participate in at school, outside of regular class hours.

A growing body of research demonstrates the benefits of participating in extracurricular activities for a wide variety of outcomes (i.e., Bouchard et al. 2023; Marsh and Kleitman 2002; Oberle et al. 2019). For example, participation in extracurricular activities during the high school years is associated with positive academic outcomes, such as higher grades and an increased likelihood of pursuing a postsecondary education (Farb and Matjasko 2012; Fredricks 2012; Neely and Vaquera 2017). By filling nonclassroom time with constructive activities, extracurricular activities can also help to decrease youth violence, increase social skills, and enhance academic achievement (Eccles and Barber 1999; Snellman et al. 2015; Zaff et al. 2003). Participation in extracurricular activities has also been shown to facilitate the adoption of desirable goal self‐regulation strategies (Guilmette et al. 2019), the acquisition of teamwork skills (de Prada Creo et al. 2021), and the development of soft skills (i.e., adaptability, personal initiative, perseverance, curiosity, leadership, and social awareness; Feraco et al. 2022; Feraco and Meneghetti 2022). Moreover, extracurricular activities can represent a valuable opportunity for encouraging academically vulnerable students to develop their strengths (Vandell et al. 2015) and decrease the likelihood of school dropout (McCabe et al. 2020; Thouin et al. 2022).

While some studies have suggested there may be a point beyond which investing more time in additional extracurriculars may do more harm than good (Cooper et al. 1999; Knifsend and Graham 2012; Matjasko et al. 2019; Ren et al. 2020), large review studies are in agreement that extracurricular activities tend to complement rather than compete with traditional curricular goals to enhance academic and nonacademic outcomes (Farb and Matjasko 2012; Marsh and Kleitman 2002; Shulruf 2010). Overall, past research generally supports the beneficial effects of extracurricular activities in youth by showing the direct effects of extracurricular activity involvement on students' positive adaptation. In general, past studies have investigated the effects of extracurricular activity as a function of the intensity (e.g., time spent or frequency in which students partake in such activities), breadth (e.g., the mere number of activities in which students are involved), and duration (e.g., length of the students' participation in the activity) of students' involvement in such activities (Farb and Matjasko 2012). However, there is a need for theory‐based evidence showing why extracurricular activity involvement is related to indicators of achievement, motivation, and other benefits in students.

In line with the positive youth development (Lerner et al. 2009) and drawing from the Self‐Determination Theory's (SDT; Ryan and Deci 2017) motivational framework, the present investigation sought to understand why extracurricular activities have, in general, such a positive impact on functioning at school. Specifically, we ask whether the kind of motivation students have for their extracurricular activities may help better understand how these activities are associated with positive (or negative) functioning at school. We argue that students may have different reasons for engaging in an extracurricular activity (Denault and Guay 2017), ranging from more autonomous reasons (e.g., joining the track‐and‐field club because they find the activity fun and interesting) to more controlled reasons (e.g., dragging their feet to basketball practice, because they feel compelled to participate). Specifically, the current research seeks to investigate whether the degree that students' motivation for an extracurricular activity is self‐determined (i.e., motivation lies on a continuum ranging from internal to more external sources of control) is associated with self‐determined motivation for school and to greater psychologically need satisfying experiences in school, which in turn, relate to positive adaptation and functioning in school.

1.1. Self‐Determination Theory (SDT) and Motivation for Engagement

Motivation represents the hypothetical construct used to describe the forces (internal or external) that produce the initiation, direction, intensity, and persistence of a behavior (Vallerand and Thill 1993). Over the past decades, SDT has been one of the most influential empirically based theories of human motivation (Ryan and Deci 2017). SDT proposes the existence of different subtypes of motivations which can be placed on a continuum based on the degree of internalization within the self (i.e., intrinsic, integrated, identified, introjected, and external). SDT also makes an important distinction between two forms of motivation: autonomous motivation and controlled motivation. Applied to the school context, students might experience autonomous motivation for their extracurricular activity if they find the activity highly enjoyable and interesting (i.e., intrinsic motivation), value‐congruent (i.e., integrated regulation) or important (i.e., identified regulation) (Ryan and Deci 2017). Contrasted with autonomous motivation is controlled motivation, which involves a person feeling pressured and compelled to engage with the activity due to internal pressures such as guilt or shame (i.e., introjected regulation) or external pressures, such as obtaining a reward or avoiding a punishment (i.e., external regulation) (Ryan and Deci 2017). Research often refers to the concept of self‐determined motivation to represent the contrast between one's autonomous and controlled motivation based on the relative influence of the distinct types of motivational regulations stemming for SDT (e.g., Gaudreau et al. 2016; Grolnick and Ryan 1987). Within educational contexts, there is considerable evidence that high levels of self‐determined motivation (i.e., autonomous motivation) are related to desirable outcomes, such as persistence, interest in learning, higher engagement, and academic attainment (see Howard et al. 2021; Ryan and Deci 2020 for reviews). In contrast, low levels of self‐determined motivation (i.e., controlled motivation) are associated with a host of undesirable outcomes, including absenteeism, dropout intentions, negative affect, and stress (see Howard et al. 2021; Ryan and Deci 2020 for reviews).

1.2. The Transfer of Motivation Between Contexts

A pathway through which we expect motivation for extracurriculars to be associated with student outcomes is through the transfer of motivation between the extracurricular context and the academic context. A preliminary study on the association between extracurricular involvement and associations with academic performance was conducted by Jones et al. (2014). These researchers found that veterinary students at two American universities who participated in extracurriculars, such as intramural sports or clubs, two times per week or more had significantly higher grades than students who participated once per week. Interestingly, the reasons students had for engaging with the extracurricular activity also appeared to matter for their grades. Students who held primarily controlled or instrumental reasons for engaging (e.g., social enhancement) had significantly lower grades than those who participated for relatively more autonomous reasons (e.g., to gain new knowledge or skills).

In a subsequent study, Denault and Guay (2017) looked at the transfer of motivation between the extracurricular and academic contexts. Their results revealed a positive association between extracurricular autonomous motivation and academic autonomous motivation both during the same school year and a year later. This finding highlighted how participation in extracurricular activities might be a promising avenue for enhancing students' academic motivation. Moreover, this finding fits predictions of the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (HMIEM; Vallerand 1997), which proposes that bidirectional effects can occur between motivation at similar contextual levels. In the context of extracurricular activities, motivation for an activity conducted within school, like sports or theater, might permeate to other domains, such as motivation for education. Similar findings have been demonstrated within the trans‐contextual model of autonomous motivation (TCM; Hagger et al. 2003). In line with the HMIEM, the TCM showed how autonomous motivation for physical education activities leads to autonomous motivation for out‐of‐school physical activity. More precisely, students who experience autonomous motivation in the physical education context will tend to internalize and develop autonomous motivation for such activities in their leisure time. In turn, students are more likely to be attracted to and develop autonomous motivation for similar activities in the future (Hagger and Chatzisarantis 2016). In the context of extracurricular activities, it is thus likely that students partaking in an extracurricular activity out of pleasure and volition are likely to create associations between the fun experienced within their extracurriculars and their scholarly activities, as both take place within the school's environment.

Denault and Guay (2017) supported the above by first demonstrating the positive relationship between motivation for extracurriculars and motivation for school. However, this study did not predict outcomes relating to the adaptation and functioning of students in class. To address this gap in the literature, we investigated the role of motivation for extracurricular activities for outcomes related to academic functioning and adaptation. Additionally, we sought to test a mediator to help explain why self‐determined motives for extracurriculars and school would positively relate to academic adaptation. Based on the premises of the HMIEM and TCM, it is proposed that students who experience autonomous motivation in an activity will tend to internalize it as a potential way to satisfy their basic psychological needs (Ryan and Deci 2017). Specifically, we hypothesized that extracurricular and school motivation may be positively related to school adaptation and functioning through the effects of psychological need satisfaction in school.

1.3. Psychological Need Satisfaction in School

SDT proposes that humans are universally oriented toward satisfying three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Ryan and Deci 2017). Autonomy refers to our need to self‐endorse actions and pursue goals that align with our values and interests. Competence refers to our need to experience mastery and accomplishment. Relatedness refers to our need to feel connected to important others. These needs are thought of as “nutrients” that are vital for psychological development, flourishing, and wellness (Ryan and Deci 2017). Psychological need satisfaction in school is related to higher levels of engagement, performance, self‐efficacy, persistence with school and improvements in quality of life (Cerasoli et al. 2016; Ratelle and Duchesne 2014; Vallerand 1997; Zhen et al. 2017), as well as lower levels of stress (Çınar‐Tanrıverdi and Karabacak‐Çelik 2023; Ratelle and Duchesne 2014). Although past research has shown that psychological need satisfaction acts as an antecedent to motivation, several scholars suggested that psychological need satisfaction could also be a consequence of motivation (Gunnell et al. 2014; Martinent et al. 2015; Vansteenkiste and Ryan 2013). As such, Martinent et al. (2015) showed that self‐determined motivation at baseline was positively related to changes in psychological need satisfaction over a 7‐month period. In a 6‐month longitudinal study, Gunnell et al. (2014) also showed that changes in autonomous motivation predicted changes in psychological need satisfaction and outcomes. Importantly, Ryan and Deci (2017) suggested that psychological need satisfaction is likely to occur in contexts where individuals feel motivated in a self‐determined fashion. Consequently, in the context of the current study, we proposed that self‐determined school motivation would be related to psychological need satisfaction in school, which in turn would be related to positive adaptation in school.

1.4. Testing the Model in Different Cultures

While several studies have considered the role of culture in extracurricular participation within the same country (Darling et al. 2005; Simpkins et al. 2011), few studies have compared extracurricular engagement across different countries and cultures. SDT considers the satisfaction of the psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness to be universally required for healthful functioning across different cultures (Ryan and Deci 2017). This may have to do with how SDT defines autonomy ‐ rather than conflate autonomy with independence or individualism, SDT's definition revolves around one's propensity to feel volition and to endorse one's behavior as value congruent, even when that behavior involves being dependent or relying on others (Ryan and Deci 2017). Thus, SDT would suggest that extracurriculars pursued with self‐determined motivation would be associated with increased psychological need satisfaction, which, in turn, should lead to desirable outcomes for all students across students from different cultures (Ryan and Deci 2017). As such, as a secondary aim of this project, we sought to test whether the pattern of results would remain consistent with regard to the positive associations between student motivation for extracurricular activities, school motivation, psychological need satisfaction, and student adjustment outcomes in student samples drawn from different cultural contexts.

1.5. The Present Study

In line with the above, the purpose of the current research was threefold. The first goal was to build upon previous research that has tested the role of motivation of extracurricular activities on motivation for school (Denault and Guay 2017). The second aim was to test the serial mediational path from extracurricular activity motivation to school outcomes via academic motivation and psychological need satisfaction in school. In line with the findings of past studies, we hypothesized that self‐determined motivation for extracurricular activities would be positively associated with self‐determined motivation for school. In turn, we hypothesized that self‐determined motivation for school would be positively associated with psychological need satisfaction in school. In turn, psychological need satisfaction would be positively related to indicators of positive adaptation in school, reported by students and their teachers. This study's third and final aim was to demonstrate the invariance of these effects between student samples from different countries (e.g., France, USA, Canada, and China). In line with SDT's tenets (Ryan and Deci 2017), we hypothesized that the effects of motivation for extracurricular activity would be invariant across cultures. Additionally, this allowed for testing SDT's claim that the processes for psychological need satisfaction should be consistent across cultures (Ryan and Deci 2017).

2. Methods

2.1. Participants and Procedure

2.1.1. Students

A total of 1247 high‐school students participated in a multinational study about the effects of extracurricular activities. Participation was voluntary and confidential. The names of participants were replaced by a code to ensure confidentiality, while allowing for the pairing of their questionnaires with data from the teachers. Part of this sample was used by Milyavskaya et al. (2009) for the purpose of examining the balance of psychological need satisfaction. No prior publication has looked at the role of extracurricular activity motivation on indicators of adaptation to school with this data set. Participants were recruited in China, the USA, Canada, and France. Among those students, 227 indicated they were not involved in an extracurricular activity. Moreover, an additional 134 students listed activities that did not qualify as extracurricular, as they lacked structure and the supervision of an adult (i.e., shopping, videogames, etc.). In total, 361 participants were removed from the final sample, which included 886 high‐school students (462 girls, 424 boys; M age = 14.95, SDage = 1.77) attending school in China (n = 267), the USA (n = 281), Canada (n = 195), and France (n = 143). Activities included individual and team sports (59.5%), arts (23.9%), additional school classes (7.7%), exercise (5.4%), or other activities (3.5%). Exploratory analyses showed that students from China were proportionally less likely to be involved in sport and exercise compared to students from France (z = −3.64, p < 0.001), Canada (z = −3.43, p < 0.001), and the USA (z = −2.58, p < 0.009). On average, students spent 4.60 h/week (SD = 4.22) participating in their extracurricular activity. Results also showed that, on average, students from the USA spent significantly more time practicing their extracurricular activity (M = 5.63, SD = 4.03) compared to students from France (M = 3.72, SD = 3.17, p < 0.001), Canada (M = 4.53, SD = 4.92, p = 0.028), and China (M = 4.03, SD = 4.15, p < 0.001).

2.1.2. Teachers

Teachers who agreed to participate were asked to send back their questionnaires by mail. In total, 9 teachers provided information for 219 students (116 girls, 103 boys; M age = 14.27, SDage = 1.49). Of those teachers, 7 were from Canada (for 131 students, 67% of the Canadian sample), 1 from the USA (for 60 students, 21% of the American sample), and 1 from France (for 28 students, 20% of the French sample). Running an a‐posteriori power analysis using Soper's (2024) power calculator showed that, considering our smallest observed R 2 value in our path analysis with teacher‐rated outcomes (all R 2 > 0.154), our sample allowed for sufficient statistical power (99.9% with α = 5%).

2.2. Measures Completed by the Students

2.2.1. Extracurricular Activity Motivation

The Academic Motivation Scale (Vallerand et al. 1992) was adapted to assess the students' motivation toward their extracurricular activity. Using a Likert‐type scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (completely), students rated 12 items assessing to what extent they took part in their extracurricular activity for extrinsic (e.g., “Because I will be punished if I don't go”), introjected (e.g., “This is a way to prove to myself that I am competent”), identified (e.g., “I think it is important”), and intrinsic (e.g., “I like to learn new things”) reasons. After calculating the average for each subscale, the Relative Autonomy Index (RAI; Grolnick and Ryan 1987) was calculated. The RAI allows for the contrasting of the relative use of autonomous motivation compared to controlled motivation while allowing for a parsimonious representation of motivation. The following formula was used to calculate the RAI: (−2)*Extrinsic + (−1)*Introjected + (1)*Identified + (2)*Intrinsic. Higher scores on the RAI represent higher levels of self‐determined motivation for the extracurricular activity. In this study, the RAI showed an acceptable degree of reliability (α = 0.77).

2.2.2. Academic Motivation

The Academic Motivation Scale (Vallerand et al. 1992) was used to assess the students' self‐determined motivation for school. Using a Likert‐type scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (completely), students completed 16 items examining to what extent they went to school for extrinsic (e.g., “Because I need at least a high‐school degree in order to find a high‐paying job later on”), introjected (e.g., “Because of the fact that when I succeed in school I feel important”), identified (e.g., “Because eventually it will enable me to enter the job market in a field that I like”), and intrinsic (e.g., “Because I really like going to school”) reasons. As with the extracurricular motivation scale, an RAI score was computed. This scale showed a good level of reliability (α = 0.86).

2.2.3. Psychological Need Satisfaction in School

Students' psychological need satisfaction was assessed using the Children's Intrinsic Need Satisfaction Scale (Véronneau et al. 2005). This 6‐item scale measures adolescent's needs for autonomy (e.g., “I feel I have a choice about when and how to do my schoolwork”), competence (e.g., “I feel I do thing well in school”), and relatedness (e.g., “My teachers like me and care about me”) in school. Each item was rated on a 5‐point Likert‐type scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 5 (very true). All three needs were aggregated to form an indicator of psychological need satisfaction in school. The scale showed good reliability (α = 0.74).

2.2.4. Mood

The 9‐item mood scale from Emmons (1992) scale was used to assess students' mood. Each student was asked to rate to what extent they experienced different adjectives pertaining to their positive (e.g., “happy”; 5 items) and negative (e.g., “angry”; 4 items) mood over the past few days prior to the assessment. Participants used a 5‐point Likert‐type scale ranging from 1 (very little or not at all) to 5 (extremely). All negative mood items were reverse‐coded before computing the average of all items. The reliability of the scale was acceptable (α = 0.81).

2.2.5. Perceived Stress in School

Students' perceptions of stress were assessed using a single item. Participants were asked to report how stressed they were in the days before data collection using a 5‐point Likert‐type scale ranging from 1 (very little or not at all) to 5 (extremely).

2.2.6. Perceptions of Overscheduling

An 8‐item scale was created for the purpose of the current study to assess students' perceptions of being overscheduled due to their involvement in extracurricular activities. Using a 5‐point Likert‐type scale ranging from 1 (not true at all) to 5 (completely true), students were asked to indicate to what extent each of the items were indicative of their involvement in their extracurricular activity (e.g., “If I could, I would drop out of one of my extracurricular activities,” “I feel overwhelmed by all the things I have to do”). The reliability of the scale was acceptable (α = 0.72).

2.2.7. Dropout Intentions

The 3‐item scale developed by Vallerand et al. (1997) was used to assess students' dropout intentions (e.g., “I intend to drop out of school”; α = 0.78). Each item was answered using a 5‐point Likert‐type scale ranging from 1 (not true at all) to 5 (completely true).

2.3. Measures Completed by the Teachers

2.3.1. Teacher‐Rated Academic Motivation

Teachers were asked to complete a 5‐item scale to assess the level of self‐determined motivation of each of their students. Teachers reported to what extent each of their student went to school for reasons that are extrinsic (“To obtain a reward” or “To please someone (i.e., the teacher)”), introjected (“By obligation (internal pressure)”), identified (“Because this student knows the importance of going to school”), or intrinsic (“Out of interest or pleasure”) using a 5‐point Likert‐type scale ranging from 1 (not true at all) to 5 (completely true). The items were then combined using the RAI formulae described above. This score had an acceptable level of reliability (α = 0.70).

2.3.2. Teacher‐Rated Self‐Efficacy

Teachers rated their perceptions of each student's self‐efficacy using four items derived from the General Perceived Self‐Efficacy Scale (Schwarzer and Jerusalem 1995). Those items assessed students' capacities to manage their problems and to adapt to stressful situation (e.g., “This student thinks they can manage the things that are coming their way,” “This student thinks they can always solve difficult problem if they put their mind to it”) using a 5‐point Likert‐type scale ranging from 1 (not true at all) to 5 (very true). This scale showed a high degree of reliability (α = 0.94).

2.3.3. Teacher‐Rated Optimism

Using four items from the Life Orientation Test (Scheier and Carver 1985), teachers rated their students' optimism. Each item (e.g., “In uncertain times, this student usually expects the best”) was rated using a 5‐point Likert‐type scale ranging from 1 (not true at all) to 5 (very true). This scale had high levels of reliability (α = 0.94).

2.3.4. Number of School Days Missed

The teachers also reported how many school days each of their students missed since the beginning of the school year.

2.4. Plan of Analyses

Preliminary analyses were conducted to inspect all variables for accuracy of data entry, missing data, and fit between their distribution and the assumptions underlying maximum likelihood procedures (Tabachnick and Fidell 2007). Missing data (0.01%) were handled using FIML in MPlus 8.4 (Muthén and Muthén 2012). Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations for all the variables used are presented below in Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations—students‐rated outcomes (n = 886).

M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Time invested in activity (hours) 4.60 4.22 —
2. Motivation for extracurricular activity 3.67 2.47 −0.01 0.77
3. Academic ‐motivation −1.27 2.45 −0.01 0.29** 0.86
4. Need satisfaction in school 3.36 0.76 0.08* 0.24** 0.25** 0.74
5. Mood in school 3.64 0.73 0.02 0.28** 0.15** 0.37** 0.81
6. Perceived stress in school 3.10 1.37 −0.01 −0.19** −0.12** −0.18** −0.46** —
7. Perceptions of overscheduling 2.36 0.73 0.08* −0.29** −0.15** −0.22** −0.41** −0.39** 0.72
8. Dropout intentions 1.40 0.74 −0.03 −0.12** −0.10** −0.28** −0.25** 0.08* 0.05 0.78
Open in a new tab

Note: Cronbach's α are on the diagonal.

*

p < 0.05;

**

p < 0.01.

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations for teacher‐rated outcomes (n = 219).

M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Time invested in activity (hours) 4.73 3.76 —
2. Motivation for extracurricular activity 4.18 2.37 −0.08 0.81
3. Academic motivation −1.48 2.51 −0.01 0.38** 0.84
4. Need satisfaction 3.38 0.73 0.19** 0.20** 0.27** 0.74
5. Teacher‐rated school motivation 3.40 1.07 −0.00 0.32** 0.25** 0.33** 0.70
6. Teacher‐rated self‐efficacy 3.64 0.99 0.09 0.28** 0.11 0.26** 0.73** 0.94
7. Teacher‐rated optimism 3.64 0.89 0.02 0.25** 0.12 0.19** 0.65** 0.87** 0.94
8. Number of school days missed 2.80 2.50 0.03 −0.36** −0.15* −0.15* −0.23** −0.16* −0.19** —
Open in a new tab

Note: Cronbach's α are on the diagonal.

*

p < 0.05;

**

p < 0.01.

Using path analysis, we tested three models aimed at replicating the findings of Denault and Guay (2017) regarding the cross‐domain effects between extracurricular activity and academic motivation. The structure of the three models was identical. Specifically, extracurricular activity motivation was entered as the main independent variable, which would be positively related to school motivation. In turn, school motivation was positively related to psychological need satisfaction in school, which would then be related to all outcomes, in both the self‐reported and teacher‐rated outcomes models. In all models, gender, age, and weekly time spent in the extracurricular activity were also added as control variables. The first model allowed for the test of our hypotheses using the complete sample (n = 886) to test our hypotheses. Then, a second, multigroup model was analyzed to test for the invariance of the hypothesized relationship as a function of the students' country of origin (USA, Canada, France, and China). A third and final model was tested with the teacher‐rated outcomes (n = 219), using the same control variables as previously mentioned.

The robust maximum likelihood estimation (MLR) procedures offered within MPlus were used to perform all path analyses. The following fit indices were thus given priority in model evaluation: the comparative fit index (CFI), the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and the standardized root mean square error (SRMR). For acceptable model fit, the CFI should be 0.90 or higher, while the RMSEA and SRMR should be 0.08 or lower (Kline 2011; Tabachnick and Fidell 2007). The significance of all effects was judged using the p value provided by MPlus. All effects below the p value of 0.05 were considered significant. To test indirect effects, the bias‐corrected bootstrap method (5000 samples with 95% bias‐corrected confidence intervals [CIs]) using the maximum likelihood procedure (ML) was used. CIs indicate a significant indirect effect when they exclude the value of zero. Invariance between the first and second models was conducted with a χ 2 difference test using the MLR estimator and using the Satorra–Bentler scaling correction provided in Mplus.

3. Results

3.1. Analyses Using the Self‐Reported Data

Results of a first model using self‐reported data supported all our hypothesized paths at the p < 0.05 level. However, the fit indices of this model were not satisfactory: χ 2 (df = 21) = 127.87, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.886, RMSEA = 0.076 (0.063, 0.089), SRMR = 0.061. Inspection of the modification indices provided by MPlus suggested the addition of direct links between extracurricular activity motivation and students' psychological need satisfaction (β = 0.180, p < 0.001), mood (β = 0.197, p < 0.001), stress (β = −0.146, p < 0.001), and perceptions of overscheduling (β = −0.259, p < 0.001). The revised model (see Figure 1) had an excellent fit to the data, as indicated by the following indices: χ 2 (df = 17) = 27.387, p = 0.005, CFI = 0.989, RMSEA = 0.026 (0.000, 0.044), SRMR = 0.0211. Regarding our hypothesized paths, the revised model's results showed that extracurricular activity motivation was positively related to academic motivation (β = 0.294, p < 0.001). Academic motivation was then positively associated with psychological need satisfaction in school (β = 0.198, p < 0.001). In turn, psychological need satisfaction was positively related to students' mood (β = 0.308, p < 0.001), while being negatively associated with perceived stress (β = −0.138, p < 0.001), perceptions of overscheduling (β = −0.141, p < 0.001), and dropout intentions (β = −0.258, p < 0.001). The results were obtained while controlling for the statistical influence of the time students spent practicing their extracurricular activity weekly, as well as their age and gender. Furthermore, results of indirect effects analyses showed that extracurricular activity motivation was indirectly related to all outcomes through the effects of school motivation and psychological need satisfaction in school (see Table 3). Overall, these results suggest that more self‐determined extracurricular motivation was positively associated with students' adjustment in school via the effects of self‐determined school motivation and psychological need satisfaction in school.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Final model for the indirect effects of extracurricular motivation on student‐rated outcomes for all students (n = 886). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. Note that the control variables and their relationships with the mediating variables (i.e., academic motivation and need satisfaction in school) and outcomes (i.e., mood, stress, perceptions of overscheduling, dropout intentions) have been grayed out to enhance the clarity of the main results.

Table 3.

Indirect effects of extracurricular activity motivation on self‐reported outcomes through the effects of school motivation and need satisfaction for all participants (total n = 886).

Extracurricular activity motivation to outcomes Indirect effect 95% CI
Mediating variables Lower Upper
Need Satisfaction School Motivation 0.058 0.037 0.085
Mood School Motivation → Need Satisfaction 0.018 0.011 0.028
Stress School Motivation → Need Satisfaction −0.008 −0.015 −0.004
Subjective Overscheduling School Motivation → Need Satisfaction −0.008 −0.015 −0.004
Dropout Intentions School Motivation → Need Satisfaction −0.015 −0.024 −0.009
Open in a new tab

3.2. Testing the Model's Invariance as a Function of the Students' Country of Origin

The multigroup path analysis results showed that most paths in Figure 1 were significant across the students' country of origin. The only exceptions were the relations between psychological need satisfaction in school and stress in the French (β = 0.004, p = 0.955) and Canadian (β = −0.097, p = 0.180) samples, as well as the relationship between psychological need satisfaction and subjective overscheduling in the Canadian sample (β = −0.106, p = 0.186). All other associations remained significant in all four samples. Furthermore, our results provided support for the indirect effects of academic motivation and psychological need satisfaction in school in the associations between extracurricular motivation and all self‐reported outcomes across the students' country of origin, with the exceptions of the indirect effects of extracurricular activity motivation on stress in the French and Canadian samples, as well as on dropout intentions in the Canadian sample (see Table 4). The model fit to the data was excellent, as indicated by the following indices: χ 2 (df = 68) = 106.939, p = 0.002, CFI = 0.961, RMSEA = 0.051 (0.031, 0.069), SRMR = 0.045. Although this model was not completely invariant across cultures compared to our initial model: Δχ 2 (Δdf = 51) = 79.55, p = 0.006, it supported the invariance of the vast majority (85%) of the hypothesized associations2.

Table 4.

Specific indirect effects of extracurricular activity motivation on self‐reported outcomes through the effects of school motivation and need satisfaction for participants of each of the four countries (total n = 886).

American sample (n = 281) Canadian sample (n = 195) Chinese sample (n = 267) French sample (n = 143)
Extracurricular activity motivation to outcomes Indirect effect 95% CI Indirect effect 95% CI Indirect effect 95% CI Indirect effect 95% CI
Mediating variables Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper
Need Satisfaction School Motivation 0.082 0.041 0.140 0.102 0.048 0.181 0.065 0.025 0.120 0.041 0.004 0.101
Mood School Motivation → Need Satisfaction 0.036 0.018 0.066 0.028 0.011 0.060 0.023 0.008 0.048 0.009 0.001 0.029
Stress School Motivation → Need Satisfaction −0.021 −0.042 −0.009 −0.010 −0.030 0.003 −0.012 −0.031 −0.003 0.000 −0.008 0.009
Subjective Overscheduling School Motivation → Need Satisfaction −0.019 −0.040 −0.008 −0.011 −0.035 0.003 −0.011 −0.030 −0.002 −0.009 −0.033 −0.001
Dropout Intentions School Motivation → Need Satisfaction −0.020 −0.044 −0.007 −0.016 −0.040 −0.004 −0.015 −0.036 −0.005 −0.011 −0.030 −0.002
Open in a new tab

3.3. Analyses Using the Teacher‐Rated Data

Regarding the teacher‐rated data, results supported all but one of our hypothesized paths at the p < 0.05 level (see Figure 2). In addition, and in line with the findings of the revised first model, significant direct links were also included between extracurricular activity motivation and students' psychological need satisfaction (β = 0.134, p = 0.083), as well as teacher‐rated academic motivation (β = 0.199, p = 0.009), self‐efficacy (β = 0.185, p = 0.005), optimism (β = 0.173, p = 0.012), and number of school days missed (β = −0.324, p < 0.001). Regarding our hypothesized paths, extracurricular activity motivation was positively related to academic motivation (β = 0.360, p < 0.001), which, in turn, was related to psychological need satisfaction in school (β = 0.220, p = 0.001). Consequently, psychological need satisfaction was positively related to students' teacher‐rated academic motivation (β = 0.251, p < 0.001), self‐efficacy (β = 0.213, p < 0.001), and optimism (β = 0.141, p = 0.021). However, psychological need satisfaction was not related to the number of school days missed (β = −0.072, p = 0.267). The results also provided support for the indirect effects of academic motivation and psychological need satisfaction in school in the relations between extracurricular motivation and all teacher‐rated outcomes, except for school days missed which was only directly and negatively related to extracurricular activity motivation (see Table 5 and Figure 2). As with the self‐reported data, the results were obtained while controlling for the statistical influence of the time students spent practicing their extracurricular activity weekly, as well as their age and gender. Globally, the model fit to the data was excellent, as indicated by the following indices: χ 2 (df = 15) = 24.630, p = 0.055, CFI = 0.984, RMSEA = 0.054 (0.000, 0.091), SRMR = 0.042.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Final model for the indirect effects of extracurricular motivation on teacher‐rated outcomes (n = 219). † p < 0.10, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. Note that the control variables and their relationships with the mediating variables (i.e., academic motivation and need satisfaction in school) and outcomes (i.e., teacher‐rated academic motivation, self‐efficacy, and optimism, as well as school days missed) have been grayed out to enhance the clarity of the main results.

Table 5.

Indirect effects of extracurricular activity motivation on teacher‐rated outcomes through the effects of school motivation and need satisfaction (n = 219).

Extracurricular activity motivation to outcomes Indirect effect 95% CI
Mediating variables Lower Upper
Need Satisfaction School Motivation 0.079 0.034 0.135
Teacher‐Rated Motivation School Motivation → Need Satisfaction 0.020 0.006 0.043
Teacher‐Rated Self‐Efficacy School Motivation → Need Satisfaction 0.017 0.006 0.037
Teacher‐Rated Optimism School Motivation → Need Satisfaction 0.011 0.002 0.028
Days of School Missed School Motivation → Need Satisfaction −0.006 −0.019 0.004
Open in a new tab

4. Discussion

The primary objective of this study was to examine the benefits of self‐determined participation in extracurricular activities on the adaptation and well‐being of high school students. Across students sampled in four countries, we found that students' self‐determined motivation for extracurricular activities was positively associated with students' mood, while negatively associated with students' perceived stress, perceptions of overscheduling, and dropout intentions. The results were also replicated within a subsample using teacher‐rated outcomes rather than student self‐report (i.e., motivation, self‐efficacy, optimism, and school days missed). While research on extracurricular activities published to date has mostly investigated the quantity of involvement in such activities (e.g., Farb and Matjasko 2012; Fredricks 2012; Oberle et al. 2019), the current findings underscore the importance of the quality of one's engagement. Indeed, engaging with extracurricular activities for autonomous reasons (such as interest) rather than for controlled reasons (such as feelings of pressure) was shown to relate to positive outcomes for the students in all four countries. Moreover, the current study showed there were no associations between the time spent participating in the activity and the students' outcomes, both self‐reported and teacher‐rated. Instead, the results show that being motivated toward extracurricular activities in a self‐determined fashion, rather than merely participating in such activities, is what related to students' outcomes in school. The results of the current study thus deepen past research by demonstrating that the reasons underlying this involvement (i.e., self‐determined motivation) have an association with the motivational, affective, and behavioral variables experienced not only in the activity, but also in school, over and above the effects of time spent in the activity.

This study also replicated research on the positive associations between motivation for extracurriculars and motivation for school (Denault and Guay 2017), but extended this study to reveal a pathway through which self‐determined motivation for extracurricular activities was associated with desirable school functioning. Namely, extracurricular self‐determined motivation was indirectly associated with greater psychological need satisfaction in school and, in turn, indicators of functioning and adaptation at school. Importantly, these effects were vastly replicated in samples of students in four different countries (i.e., France, Canada, USA, and China), highlighting the generalizability of the effects in different cultural settings. Additionally, we were able to replicate the model with teacher‐rated outcomes, thus supporting the robustness of the present model beyond self‐reported effects. This study provides additional support for SDT (Ryan and Deci 2017), the HMIEM (Vallerand 1997), and the TCM (Hagger et al. 2003) while also having applied educational implications.

Firstly, this study offers additional support for SDT, a theory that has become increasingly important theory in educational psychology (Reeve 2016). Our study confirms the well‐established benefits of self‐determined motivation but provides novel insight by demonstrating how self‐determined motivation for a nonacademic structured activity can seep into the academic domain, by being positively associated with self‐determined academic motives and psychological need satisfaction in school. Indeed, while the beneficial role of perceived psychological need satisfaction has been supported in the education sphere (Milyavskaya et al. 2009; Ratelle and Duchesne 2014; Sheldon and Krieger 2007; Véronneau et al. 2005), these previous studies have not considered the role of extracurricular activity motivation as a factor associated with positive adaptation to school through greater self‐determined academic motivation and psychological need satisfaction in school. This finding also provides further support to the HMIEM (Vallerand 1997) and the TCM (Hagger et al. 2003), by showing that self‐determined motivation for an activity conducted within school (e.g., a contextual level) can permeate to positively influence self‐determined motivation for one's studies (e.g., another contextual level).

This has exciting implications for educational practices where it may not be possible to alter certain aspects of the academic environment (e.g., the mandatory school curriculum). However, it may be possible to make extracurricular activities more appealing and personally relevant to students, thus enhancing self‐determined motivation. Similarly, school programs without extracurricular activities could benefit greatly from offering a few extracurricular programs, although issues pertaining to resources and cost may limit the feasibility of this recommendation. When possible, parents could also look to enroll their children in extracurricular programs outside of the school context when these are not offered.

For schools that do offer extracurricular programs, careful attention should be given to the extent to which students perceive these activities as being fun, meaningful, interesting or personally important. Adaptations, such as allowing students to choose their extracurricular activities may enhance self‐determined motivation for these activities. Similarly, the teaching style of the activity leaders may be important. An autonomy‐supportive teaching and mentorship style may be a critical factor for students to develop self‐determined motivation toward the extracurricular activity (Reeve 2016). This would involve the activity leader being warm and empathetic, taking students' perspectives, giving students plenty of choices, and providing a rationale when imposing certain activities or restrictions (Reeve 2016). Likewise, limiting external controls such as rewards and competition may help students to feel more self‐determined about the extracurricular activity.

4.1. Limitations and Future Directions

Although this study had strengths, including a large sample size, teacher reports, and cross‐cultural samples, limitations must be considered when interpreting these findings. The cross‐sectional nature of the data precludes formulating causal conclusions. While we base our model on the longitudinal extracurricular and academic motivation research by Denault and Guay (2017), future research is needed to replicate the presented associations in a longitudinal design. Furthermore, experimental studies are needed to demonstrate the causality of effects. Autonomy‐enhancing interventions in extracurricular school programs could be a strategy to test if subsequent changes in motivation translate into greater self‐determined motives for school, greater psychological need satisfaction in school, and more positive school functioning. It is also important to note that, although the analyses tested and provided support for the invariance of the path analysis, the measurement invariance across countries was not tested. This is because of the complexity of the model and the required sample size to conduct such analyses. However, future research could address this limitation to ensure the measures are invariant across countries. Also regarding the measures, another limitation pertains to the extracurricular motivation scale, which was adapted from the Academic Motivation Scale (Vallerand et al. 1992). Future research might consider developing and validating a specific scale in the context of extracurricular activities.

Future studies could also include more objective measures of student learning and performance, such as grades, or teacher‐rated academic performance. It would also be important to identify the factors responsible for cultivating self‐determined motivation for extracurricular activities. Another limitation pertains to the fact that the study's design did not allow for the investigation of cross‐cultural effects with regards to teacher‐rated outcomes due to the small number of teachers (n = 9) who completed the survey. However, discrepancies can exist between informants (i.e., students and teachers) when evaluating the functioning of students in school (De Los Reyes et al. 2019). Consequently, the fact that the current results converged to highly similar conclusions for outcomes assessed by both the students and their teachers provided further support for the beneficial effect self‐determined extracurricular motivation on students' functioning. Moreover, the use of multilevel modeling with larger samples of teachers could prove useful to control for the statistical influence of variables associated at the teacher (i.e., teacher–student relationship, group dynamics, etc.) or school (e.g., school climate, quality of the infrastructure or programs available to students, etc.) levels.

In conclusion, the present investigation is unique in its exploration of adolescents' motivation for extracurricular activities and how this relates to adaptation at school. Our results demonstrate the importance of teenagers' self‐determined motivation for extracurriculars, which appears to be beneficial across cultures and outcomes. Moreover, these effects appear observable to the students' teachers. Thus, a promising strategy to unleash a child's full potential and keep them committed to their education may be to have them wholeheartedly engage with extracurricular activities, which appears to be strongly associated with motivation, psychological need satisfaction, and adaptation to the school environment.

Supporting information

R2 ‐ Supplemental files (2).docx.

JAD-97-1869-s001.docx (17.8KB, docx)

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by grants from the Fonds de Recherche du Québec—Société et Culture (FRQSC) and the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) to the Richard Koestner. The FQRSC grant was for the Action Concertée Program aimed to understand school perseverance.

Endnotes

1

To ensure our model was the best fitting, all five possible alternative models were estimated (see Supporting File S1 for more detail).

2

An alternative model was tested using the country of origin as a dummy variable. The results remained similar to our original model—see Supporting File S2 for more details.

References

  1. Billingsley, J. T. , and Hurd N. M.. 2019. “Discrimination, Mental Health and Academic Performance Among Underrepresented College Students: The Role of Extracurricular Activities at Predominantly White Institutions.” Social Psychology of Education 22: 421–446. 10.1007/s11218-019-09484-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bouchard, M. , Denault A. S., and Guay F.. 2023. “Extracurricular Activities and Adjustment Among Students at Disadvantaged High Schools: The Mediating Role of Peer Relatedness and School Belonging.” Journal of Adolescence 95: 509–523. 10.1002/jad.12132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cerasoli, C. P. , Nicklin J. M., and Nassrelgrgawi A. S.. 2016. “Performance, Incentives, and Needs for Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness: A Meta‐Analysis.” Motivation and Emotion 40: 781–813. 10.1007/s11031-016-9578-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Chapman, C. , Laird J., and Kewalramani A.. 2010. Trends in High School Dropout and Completion Rates in the United States: 1972–2008. Compendium Report. National Center for Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
  5. Çınar‐Tanrıverdi, E. , and Karabacak‐Çelik A.. 2023. “Psychological Need Satisfaction and Academic Stress in College Students: Mediator Role of Grit and Academic Self‐Efficacy.” European Journal of Psychology of Education 38: 131–160. 10.1007/s10212-022-00658-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cooper, H. , Valentine J. C., Nye B., and Lindsay J. J.. 1999. “Relationships Between Five After‐School Activities and Academic Achievement.” Journal of Educational Psychology 91: 369–378. 10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.369. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Darling, N. , Caldwell L. L., and Smith R.. 2005. “Participation in School‐Based Extracurricular Activities and Adolescent Adjustment.” Journal of Leisure Research 37: 51–76. 10.1080/00222216.2005.11950040. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. De Los Reyes, A. , Cook C. R., Gresham F. M., Makol B. A., and Wang M.. 2019. “Informant Discrepancies in Assessments of Psychosocial Functioning in School‐Based Services and Research: Review and Directions for Future Research.” Journal of School Psychology 74: 74–89. 10.1016/j.jsp.2019.05.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. de Prada Creo, E. , Mareque M., and Portela‐Pino I.. 2021. “The Acquisition of Teamwork Skills in University Students Through Extra‐Curricular Activities.” Education and Training 63: 165–181. 10.1108/ET-07-2020-0185. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Denault, A. S. , and Guay F.. 2017. “Motivation Towards Extracurricular Activities and Motivation at School: A Test of the Generalization Effect Hypothesis.” Journal of Adolescence 54: 94–103. 10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.11.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Denault, A. S. , Ratelle C. F., Duchesne S., and Guay F.. 2019. “Extracurricular Activities and Career Indecision: A Look at the Mediating Role of Vocational Exploration.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 110: 43–53. 10.1016/j.jvb.2018.11.006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Eccles, J. S. , and Barber B. L.. 1999. “Student Council, Volunteering, Basketball, or Marching Band: What Kind of Extracurricular Involvement Matters?” Journal of Adolescent Research 14: 10–43. 10.1177/0743558499141003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Emmons, R. A. 1992. “Abstract Versus Concrete Goals: Personal Striving Level, Physical Illness, and Psychological Well‐Being.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62: 292–300. 10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.292. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Farb, A. F. , and Matjasko J. L.. 2012. “Recent Advances in Research on School‐Based Extracurricular Activities and Adolescent Development.” Developmental Review 32: 1–48. 10.1016/j.dr.2011.10.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Feraco, T. , and Meneghetti C.. 2022. “Sport Practice, Fluid Reasoning, and Soft Skills in 10‐ to 18‐Year‐Olds.” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 16: 1–8. 10.3389/fnhum.2022.857412. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Feraco, T. , Resnati D., Fregonese D., Spoto A., and Meneghetti C.. 2022. “Soft Skills and Extracurricular Activities Sustain Motivation and Self‐Regulated Learning at School.” Journal of Experimental Education 90: 550–569. 10.1080/00220973.2021.1873090. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Fredricks, J. A. 2012. “Extracurricular Participation and Academic Outcomes: Testing the Over‐Scheduling Hypothesis.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 41: 295–306. 10.1007/s10964-011-9704-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Gaudreau, P. , Franche V., and Gareau A.. 2016. “A Latent Mediated Moderation of Perfectionism, Motivation, and Academic Satisfaction.” Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 34: 688–701. 10.1177/0734282916651778. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Grolnick, W. S. , and Ryan R. M.. 1987. “Autonomy in Children's Learning: An Experimental and Individual Difference Investigation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52: 890–898. 10.1037/0022-3514.52.5.890. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Guilmette, M. , Mulvihill K., Villemaire‐Krajden R., and Barker E. T.. 2019. “Past and Present Participation in Extracurricular Activities Is Associated With Adaptive Self‐Regulation of Goals, Academic Success, and Emotional Wellbeing Among University Students.” Learning and Individual Differences 73: 8–15. 10.1016/j.lindif.2019.04.006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Gunnell, K. E. , Crocker P. R. E., Mack D. E., Wilson P. M., and Zumbo B. D.. 2014. “Goal Contents, Motivation, Psychological Need Satisfaction, Well‐Being and Physical Activity: A Test of Self‐Determination Theory Over 6 Months.” Psychology of Sport and Exercise 15: 19–29. 10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.08.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Hagger, M. S. , and Chatzisarantis N. L. D.. 2016. “The Trans‐Contextual Model of Autonomous Motivation in Education: Conceptual and Empirical Issues and Meta‐Analysis.” Review of Educational Research 86: 360–407. 10.3102/0034654315585005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Hagger, M. S. , Chatzisarantis N. L. D., Culverhouse T., and Biddle S. J. H.. 2003. “The Processes by Which Perceived Autonomy Support in Physical Education Promotes Leisure‐Time Physical Activity Intentions and Behavior: A Trans‐Contextual Model.” Journal of Educational Psychology 95: 784–795. 10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.784. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Howard, J. L. , Bureau J., Guay F., Chong J. X. Y., and Ryan R. M.. 2021. “Student Motivation and Associated Outcomes: A Meta‐Analysis From Self‐Determination Theory.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 16: 1300–1323. 10.1177/1745691620966789. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Jones, M. L. , Rush B. R., Elmore R. G., and White B. J.. 2014. “Level of and Motivation for Extracurricular Activity Are Associated With Academic Performance in the Veterinary Curriculum.” Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 41: 275–283. 10.3138/jvme.1213-163R. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Kline, R. B. 2011. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed. Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  27. Knifsend, C. A. , and Graham S.. 2012. “Too Much of a Good Thing? How Breadth of Extracurricular Participation Relates to School‐Related Affect and Academic Outcomes During Adolescence.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 41: 379–389. 10.1007/s10964-011-9737-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Lerner, J. V. , Phelps E., Forman Y., and Bowers E. P.. 2009. Positive Youth Development. John Wiley & Sons Inc. [Google Scholar]
  29. Marsh, H. , and Kleitman S.. 2002. “Extracurricular School Activities: The Good, the Bad, and the Nonlinear.” Harvard Educational Review 72: 464–514. 10.17763/haer.72.4.051388703v7v7736. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Martinent, G. , Guillet‐Descas E., and Moiret S.. 2015. “A Reciprocal Effects Model of the Temporal Ordering of Basic Psychological Needs and Motivation.” Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 37: 117–126. 10.1123/jsep.2014-0093. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Matjasko, J. L. , Holland K. M., Holt M. K., Espelage D. L., and Koenig B. W.. 2019. “All Things in Moderation? Threshold Effects in Adolescent Extracurricular Participation Intensity and Behavioral Problems.” Journal of School Health 89: 79–87. 10.1111/josh.12715. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. McCabe, J. , Dupéré V., Dion E., et al. 2020. “Why Do Extracurricular Activities Prevent Dropout More Effectively in Some High Schools Than in Others? A Mixed‐Method Examination of Organizational Dynamics.” Applied Developmental Science 24: 323–338. 10.1080/10888691.2018.1484746. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Milyavskaya, M. , Gingras I., Mageau G. a, et al. 2009. “Balance Across Contexts: Importance of Balanced Need Satisfaction Across Various Life Domains.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 35: 1031–1045. 10.1177/0146167209337036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Muthén, L. K. , and Muthén B. O.. 2012. MPlus: The Comprehensive Modeling Program for Applied Researchers: User's Guide , 7th ed.
  35. Neely, S. R. , and Vaquera E.. 2017. “Making It Count: Breadth and Intensity of Extracurricular Engagement and High School Dropout.” Sociological Perspectives 60: 1039–1062. 10.1177/0731121417700114. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Oberle, E. , Ji X. R., Magee C., Guhn M., Schonert‐Reichl K. A., and Gadermann A. M.. 2019. “Extracurricular Activity Profiles and Wellbeing in Middle Childhood: A Population‐Level Study.” PLoS One 14: e0218488. 10.1371/journal.pone.0218488. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Ratelle, C. F. , and Duchesne S.. 2014. “Trajectories of Psychological Need Satisfaction From Early to Late Adolescence as a Predictor of Adjustment in School.” Contemporary Educational Psychology 39: 388–400. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.09.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Reeve, J. 2016. “A Grand Theory of Motivation: Why Not?” Motivation and Emotion 40: 31–35. 10.1007/s11031-015-9538-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. Ren, L. , Kutaka T. S., Chernyavskiy P., Fan J., and Li X.. 2020. “The Linear and Nonlinear Effects of Organized Extracurricular Activities on Chinese Preschoolers' Development.” Contemporary Educational Psychology 60: 101845. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101845. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Ryan, R. M. , and Deci E. L.. 2017. Self‐Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness. Guilford Publications. [Google Scholar]
  41. Ryan, R. M. , and 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. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  42. Scheier, M. F. , and Carver C. S.. 1985. “Optimism, Coping, and Health: Assessment and Implications of Generalized Outcome Expectancies.” Health Psychology 4: 219–247. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Schwarzer, R. , and Jerusalem M.. 1995. “Generalized Self‐Efficacy Scale.” In Measures in Health Psychology: A User's Portfolio. Causal and Control Beliefs. NFER‐NELSON. [Google Scholar]
  44. Sheldon, K. M. , and Krieger L. S.. 2007. “Understanding the Negative Effects of Legal Education on Law Students: A Longitudinal Test of Self‐Determination Theory.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 33: 883–897. 10.1177/0146167207301014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Shulruf, B. 2010. “Do Extra‐Curricular Activities in Schools Improve Educational Outcomes? A Critical Review and Meta‐Analysis of the Literature.” International Review of Education 56: 591–612. 10.1007/s11159-010-9180-x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Simpkins, S. D. , O'Donnell M., Delgado M. Y., and Becnel J. N.. 2011. “Latino Adolescents' Participation in Extracurricular Activities: How Important Are Family Resources and Cultural Orientation?” Applied Developmental Science 15: 37–50. 10.1080/10888691.2011.538618. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Snellman, K. , Silva J. M., Frederick C. B., and Putnam R. D.. 2015. “The Engagement Gap: Social Mobility and Extracurricular Participation Among American Youth.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 657: 194–207. 10.1177/0002716214548398. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Soper, D. S. 2024. Post‐Hoc Statistical Power Calculator for Multiple Regression. https://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc.
  49. Tabachnick, B. G. , and Fidell L. S.. 2007. Using Multivariate Statistics, 5th ed. Allyn & Bacon. [Google Scholar]
  50. Thouin, É. , Dupéré V., Dion E., et al. 2022. “School‐Based Extracurricular Activity Involvement and High School Dropout Among At‐Risk Students: Consistency Matters.” Applied Developmental Science 26: 303–316. 10.1080/10888691.2020.1796665. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Vallerand, R. J. 1997. “Toward a Hierarchical Model of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation.” In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, edited by Zanna M. P., 29, 271–360. Academic Press. 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60019-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Vallerand, R. J. , Fortier M. S., and Guay F.. 1997. “Self‐Determination and Persistence in a Real‐Life Setting: Toward a Motivational Model of High School Dropout.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 72: 1161–1176. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Vallerand, R. J. , Pelletier L. G., Blais M. R., Briere N. M., Senecal C., and Vallieres E. F.. 1992. “The Academic Motivation Scale: A Measure of Intrinsic, Extrinsic and Amotivation in Education.” Educational and Psychological Measurement 52: 1003–1017. 10.1177/0013164492052004025. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  54. Vallerand, R. J. , and Thill E. E.. 1993. Introduction à la psychologie de la motivation [Introduction to the Psychology of Motivation]. Études Vivantes. [Google Scholar]
  55. Vandell, D. L. , Larson R. W., Mahoney J. L., and Watts T. W.. 2015. “Children's Organized Activities.” In Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science, edited by Bornstein H., Leventhal T., and Lerner R. M., 7th ed., 305–344. Wiley. 10.1002/9781118963418.childpsy408. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  56. Vansteenkiste, M. , and Ryan R. M.. 2013. “On Psychological Growth and Vulnerability: Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Need Frustration as a Unifying Principle.” Journal of Psychotherapy Integration 23: 263–280. 10.1037/a0032359. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. Véronneau, M.‐H. , Koestner R. F., and Abela J. R. Z.. 2005. “Intrinsic Need Satisfaction and Well–Being in Children and Adolescents: An Application of the Self–Determination Theory.” Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 24: 280–292. 10.1521/jscp.24.2.280.62277. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Zaff, J. F. , Moore K. A., Papillo A. R., and Williams S.. 2003. “Implications of Extracurricular Activity Participation During Adolescence on Positive Outcomes.” Journal of Adolescent Research 18: 599–630. 10.1177/0743558403254779. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Zhen, R. , Liu R. D., Ding Y., Wang J., Liu Y., and Xu L.. 2017. “The Mediating Roles of Academic Self‐Efficacy and Academic Emotions in the Relation Between Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction and Learning Engagement Among Chinese Adolescent Students.” Learning and Individual Differences 54: 210–216. 10.1016/j.lindif.2017.01.017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

R2 ‐ Supplemental files (2).docx.

JAD-97-1869-s001.docx (17.8KB, docx)

Articles from Journal of Adolescence are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES