NONCOGNITIVE FACTORS AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE:

A STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING ANALYSIS

A THESIS PROPOSAL

Presented to the
Faculty of the Department of Psychology
College of Humanities and Social Sciences
Caraga State University-Main Campus
Ampayon, Butuan City

In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degre
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN PSYCHOLOGY

Gladness Angel E. Escobal

Maime Rhowin G. Grado
Andre T. Gulle
Andrian Paul Q. Moreno

December 2024
 i

Table of Contents

Page No.
Table of Contents i
CHAPTER
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background of the Study 1
1.2 Review of Related Literature 3
1.3 Statement of the Problem 22
1.4 Research Hypotheses 22
1.5 Significance of the Study 23
1.6 Scope and Limitations of the Study 25
1.7 Theoretical Framework 26
1.8 Conceptual Framework 28
1.9 Operational Definition of Terms 29
2 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Research Design 32
2.2 Research Locale 33
2.3 Research Participants 33
2.4 Sampling Technique 34
2.5 Data Gathering Procedure 35
2.6 Research Instruments 36
2.7 Data Analysis 41
2.8 Ethical Consideration 41
REFERENCES 45
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Research Instruments 59
Appendix B. Granted Permission for Research Instrument-Use 70
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

The Philippines’ education system remains notorious for its failure in

producing globally competitive learners; having consistently ranked low in global
and ASEAN rankings when it comes to education (OECD, 2019). With the
Philippines’ top university placed in the 401-500 bracket from their previous 84th
ranking in the Asia University Rankings last March 2024 (The Times Higher
Education, 2024). The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)
results from 2018 showed that out of the 79 countries, the Philippines ranked
dead last in reading and second to the last in Mathematics and Science.
Comparing those results to the PISA 2022, little to no increase was observed
(OECD, 2019, 2023). These statistics show only a glimpse into the country’s
systemic issues within the education system and a call for more integrated
interventions.

There is still a lack of emphasis on holistic approaches and

learner-centered care when it comes to academic success and interventions
(Cuseo, 2015; Crutchfield, 2020; Qargha, 2023). Traditionally, the Philippine
education system has placed a strong emphasis on cognitive factors, such as
intelligence quotient (IQ) and academic aptitude, as the primary determinants of
academic success (Bate, 2022). But noncognitive factors also greatly contributed
to Filipino students’ (Magpily & Mercado, 2015) academic performance. Not as
an alternative focus, but rather, serving as two sides of the same coin as
cognitive factors (Farruggia et al., 2018; Wanzer et al., 2019; Sultanova, 2024;
see also Farrington et al., 2012).

Noncognitive factors—such as motivation, perseverance, self-regulation,

and social skills—play a critical role in shaping academic performance and future
 2

success (Farrington et al., 2012). Alarmingly, many students who demonstrate

high intelligence do not achieve their full academic potential, often due to
deficiencies in these essential noncognitive attributes (Duckworth & Seligman,
2005). However, the interplay between noncognitive factors and academic
performance is not uniform across different demographic groups; research
indicates that these associations can vary significantly based on race or ethnicity.
For instance, studies have shown that African American students often
experience a stronger correlation between their sense of belonging in an
educational setting and their overall academic achievement compared to White
students (Tracey & Sedlacek, 1987). This suggests that fostering inclusive
environments that enhance students' social skills and emotional support may be
particularly crucial for underrepresented minorities, as it could mitigate
achievement gaps and promote greater retention rates (Walton & Cohen, 2011).
Thus, understanding the nuanced dynamics of how noncognitive factors
influence diverse student populations becomes essential for developing effective
interventions aimed at enhancing academic outcomes for all learners.

Globally, the PISA 2018 results revealed that students who exhibited
higher levels of resilience and motivation performed significantly better in both
reading and mathematics, regardless of their socioeconomic backgrounds
(OECD, 2019). Furthermore, the PISA 2022 assessment reinforced these
findings, showing that noncognitive skills are increasingly linked to students'
overall academic achievement and well-being (OECD, 2022). In the ASEAN
region, the emphasis on holistic education that integrates both cognitive and
noncognitive skills is gaining traction. Countries like Singapore and Vietnam have
implemented comprehensive educational reforms that prioritize the development
of noncognitive factors alongside traditional academic curricula, leading to
improved student outcomes (ASEAN Secretariat, 2022). In addition to the
educational reforms observed in ASEAN countries, there is a growing recognition
of the necessity for targeted interventions that address the unique noncognitive
needs of diverse student populations. For example, students from low
 3

socioeconomic backgrounds often face additional barriers to developing essential

skills such as perseverance and self-regulation, which can further exacerbate
academic disparities (Farruggia et al., 2018). Programs designed to enhance
these skills through mentorship and community engagement have shown
promise; they not only foster resilience but also create supportive networks that
encourage academic persistence among at-risk students (Morrow & Ackermann,
2012). As mentioned earlier, the Philippines 2018 and 2022 PISA results
evidenced the need for a more robust focus on noncognitive skills as Filipino
students struggled with motivation and engagement in their studies (OECD,
2022).

Despite the slowly growing recognition of noncognitive factors as vital

components of academic success, significant gaps remain in understanding how
these factors can be effectively integrated into the education system and
practices. Although literature highlights students’ time management, study
approaches, support system, spirituality, and an emphasis on self-regulation and
their mindset; research that focuses on these noncognitive factors are yet to be
studied in the Philippines, much less in the local scene. Existing studies on
noncognitive factors in the country involve a majority of its sample stemming from
elementary to senior high school students. Moreover, therein lies the interplay
between these factors that may or may not affect one another. This study aims to
address these significant gaps in the existing body of research by understanding
the relationship of these noncognitive factors that affect students’ academic
performance. Furthermore, the findings of this study can aid institutions,
counselors, peers, family members, and educators in providing interventions and
enhancing noncognitive skill development in students across various contexts.

1.2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The increasing recognition of noncognitive factors in academic

performance has sparked interest among researchers in exploring how these
 4

elements influence student success. Studies have increasingly focused on

understanding the relationship between various noncognitive factors—such as
time management, peer support, study techniques, family support,
self-regulation, and student mindsets—and their impact on academic outcomes.
Specifically, research has examined how these factors interact with demographic
and contextual variables to shape students' educational trajectories. This
literature review provides an overview of these findings, analyzing trends and
uncovering underlying issues related to the role of noncognitive factors in
academic performance.

Cognitive and Noncognitive Factors on Academic Performance

Academic performance is influenced by a multitude of factors, which can

be categorized into cognitive and noncognitive factors (Molnár & Kocsis, 2023).
Cognitive factors such as intelligence, analytical skills, and knowledge acquisition
have been traditionally emphasized in academic settings. It involves skills like
attention, memory, and reasoning. This ability is crucial for completing tasks
successfully, hence it is one of the most studied and strong predictors for
academic achievement (Shi & Qu, 2021). However, recent research highlights
the equally important role of noncognitive factors that goes beyond cognitive
abilities. Non-cognitive factors include traits and skills that encompass attitudes,
behaviors, and emotional intelligence (Sultanova et al., 2024). These
noncognitive elements do not stand in opposition to cognitive factors, rather, they
complement and enhance cognitive factors, creating a more holistic approach to
understanding student success (Amadi et al., 2022).

Noncognitive factors include a range of attributes such as motivation,

self-regulation, perseverance, social skills, and emotional intelligence. Studies
have shown that some traits significantly impact academic performance and can
sometimes be even more predictive of success than cognitive abilities alone
(Agarwal & Arya, 2021). A recent study found that non-cognitive factors skills like
 5

motivation and self-regulation are just as important as intelligence in determining

academic success. These abilities become more influential especially throughout
a child’s education, with genetic factors playing an important role. The findings
indicate that developing non-cognitive skills alongside cognitive abilities could
significantly improve academic outcomes (Non-cognitive Skills: The Hidden Key
to Academic Success, 2024).

Furthermore, Adriano (2021) conducted a study that aims to investigate

students’ perceptions of noncognitive skills, and if they place emphasis on those
skills in terms of academic achievement. The findings show that students
recognize the importance of noncognitive skills and are known as soft skills. They
understand that alongside cognitive skills, noncognitive skills are essential for
success in higher education. The findings also highlighted that to better prepare
students for the future, higher education institutions should integrate the
development of these noncognitive skills into their academic programs. These
skills not only are great predictors for academic success but also highly
transferable to the workplace and can give graduates a competitive edge in
today’s job market.

Additionally, Savenkov (2021) conducted a study that explores the

relationship between cognitive and noncognitive factors, giftedness, and
academic and life success. The study suggests that while cognitive factors may
be important for initial academic success, noncognitive factors become
increasingly crucial as individuals progress through their education and career.
The balance between these two factors is essential for long-term success.

In a local study conducted by Cabalquinto and Magallanes (2022)

examined how self-efficacy, study strategies, teacher support, and student
involvement affect mathematics performance among the Bachelor of Secondary
Education students. The findings showed that these non-cognitive factors directly
 6

impact students’ academic achievements, suggesting that developing and

fostering these traits could enhance students’ educational outcomes.

GWA and Academic Performance

The General Weighted Average (GWA) is a cumulative measure that

reflects a student’s academic performance across various subjects, weighted by
the credit hours of each course. In the Philippines it is mostly measured on a
scale of 1.00 (highest) to 5.00 (lowest) and takes into account different credit
units assigned to each course (Dokor, 2024b). It serves as a critical indicator of a
student’s overall academic success and is often used for assessing eligibility for
college admission, honors, scholarships, and other academic recognitions
(Volwerk and Tindal, 2011)

Recent studies have established that GWA is a strong predictor of

academic success. In a study conducted by Barnacha et al. (2022) which
examined the predictive validity of undergraduate students’ GWA on their
performance in the Licensure Examination for Certified Public Accountants
(LECPA). The findings show a statistically significant positive relationship
between students’ GWAs in relevant subjects and their subsequent performance
in the licensure exam, confirming that higher GWAs correlate with better
examination results. This suggests that GWA is an effective measure for
forecasting future academic and professional success.

In a study, Maslang (2023) explored the cognitive and non-cognitive

factors that could predict academic performance. The findings showed that the
Grade 12 General Weighted Average (GWA) was the best predictor of overall
academic achievement across all semesters for first-and-second-year university
students. The study identifies GWA as the strongest indicator of both overall
academic achievement and eligibility for scholarships across multiple semesters.
Unlike other factors, GWA not only consistently predicts performance and reflects
 7

cognitive ability but also embodies essential noncognitive traits, such as

self-discipline and time management, which contribute to long term overall
academic performance.

Time Management and Academic Performance

Academe is a multifaceted system that demands students to balance both

their academic and extracurricular activities at the same time which requires
great dedication and effort (Ephraim, 2024). Time management as staff (2023)
defined it, is the act of consciously spending your time in planning and controlling
your activities, setting goals, and staying organized to increase efficiency and
productivity. Several studies have shown a strong correlation between time
management and how well students can perform and manage their educational
outcomes (KHAN et al., 2020).

Furthermore, a study conducted by Ahmad and Batool (2019) shows that

both distance and regular students can enhance their academic performance
when they can use their time more effectively. Misuse and Mismanagement of
time can decrease the performance of a student and can lead to failure.

Moreover, Bhatia and Sharma (2023) highlighted the impact of time

management to students’ academic achievement across all grade levels and
identified that time management behaviors such as planning, prioritizing tasks,
and setting goals are effective in overcoming difficulties and obstacles that hinder
the progress of students towards their academic performance. Structured daily
routines that incorporate time management practices can reduce stress levels
among students by preventing them from procrastinating and having chaotic
schedules (Simplilearn, 2023).

Similarly, one study conducted by Nayak (2019) found that students who
procrastinate and have poor time management skills are more likely to
 8

experience academic stress. This academic stress can have negative effects on
the students’ physical and mental health which can also impact their overall
academic performance. This indicates that implementing structured time
management practices can serve as a buffer against the pressure of academic
life (Loandes et al., 2020).

This positive correlation between time management skills and academic

performance is further supported by various studies. A study conducted by
Adams and Blair (2020) examines the self-reported time management behaviors
of undergraduate engineering students using a Time Management Behavior
Scale and found that students’ perceived control of their time has a significant
correlation to the student’s cumulative grade point average (GPA).

In a local context, Mariano et al. (2022) investigates the relationship

between time management skills and academic performance. The results
indicated that most respondents exhibited a good level of time management
skills. In terms of academic performance, the majority fell into the “approaching
proficiency” category, suggesting that they had developed fundamental
knowledge and skills with minimal guidance. The correlation analysis revealed a
very high positive significant relationship between time management skills and
academic performance, indicating that cultivating these skills among students
can significantly enhance their academic success.

However, Tome et al. (2022) explored the relationship between time

management and academic performance and found that while time management
is important, it did not have a direct significant impact on academic performance.
Nevertheless, it still played a crucial role in helping them organize their tasks
effectively. While not finding a direct positive correlation, students recognized the
importance of time management but often struggled with procrastination and
distractions, which can negatively impact their ability to use time more effectively.
 9

While Time management undeniably plays a role in enhancing academic

performance, it is equally important to recognize the influence of support systems
and other noncognitive factors in furthering student success. The ability to
manage time efficiently is often bolstered by the emotional, academic and any
other social resources provided by family and peers, and a support system will
create a more comprehensive approach to academic challenges.

Support Systems on Student Academic Performance

Social support and self-esteem are key factors that contribute to students’
academic success. Social support refers to the network of friends, family, and
others who provide emotional and practical assistance during challenging times.
These support systems can improve overall well-being and help individuals cope
with stress and adversity (MSEd, 2024c).

Chen et al. (2023) conducted a study which aims to investigate how social
support affects students’ engagement in their studies and the role of motivation
and life satisfaction in this process. The findings indicated that social support
significantly predicts academic motivation serving as mediating factors. This
highlights the importance of positive relationships in enhancing students’
academic experiences and outcomes.

Moreover, in a study conducted by Johnson et al. (2022b) examined the

help-seeking behavior of students in relation to campus services. The study
found a significant association between utilization of support services and student
success and persistence over two semesters. It highlighted that effective student
support services, such as tutoring and mentoring are crucial for improving
academic performance, particularly for at-risk students.

Furthermore, Saeed et al. (2023b) used structural equation modeling to

investigate how social support affects academic achievement and whether
 10

self-esteem plays a mediating role in this relationship. It was found that higher
levels of social support from family, and friends tend to have higher self-esteem
and were associated with better academic achievement. Therefore, in efforts to
improve students’ academic performance, it is important to foster a strong social
support system. This includes educating parents and caregivers about the
importance of providing emotional support and fostering self-esteem in their
children, especially those with special needs. Additionally, schools and
communities should work to create a supportive environment that promotes
positive social interactions and reduces feelings of isolation.

Finally, Li et al. (2022) highlighted the positive impact of school support

systems on student development across various educational contexts. The study
emphasized that effective school support contributes significantly to enhancing
students’ academic performance by providing necessary resources and
emotional backing.

Family as a Support System

Family or parental guidance have long been recognized as one

supporting factor and crucial for each development of individuals (Van Niekerk &
Breed, 2018). In fact, it serves a great purpose as parents are the first teachers
and to allow them to experience and be open to anything whether good or bad. A
study by Pachina (2020), said that the earliest teachers of a child are their
parents and the first and greatest role models for their kids. The family, especially
parents or even care takers, play a significant role in instilling moral values as
they serve as children’s primary and most important social connections (Rahman,
2019).

Several studies have investigated the influence of family support on

college students’ academic performance (Edelman 2013; Ratelle, Larose, Guay
& Sene´cal; 2005; Savage, 2009; Spain, 2008; Winegard, 2010). However, very
 11

few parents provide academic support. What literature shows is that parental
academic support at the college level takes on different forms but does not
include direct academic support. Parents feel less capable of assisting
academically because the college curriculum is more advanced. In fact, parents
are unable to provide much counsel in social issues as the college student no
longer seeks permission for their actions (Tugend, 2014; Jeynes, 2007). The
attachment theory proposed by Kek, Darmawan, and Chen (2007) shows the
indirect ways parental involvement affects academic performance. Kek,
Darmawan, and Chen (2007) argue that growing up in a secure, supportive
family environment tends to foster high levels of self-efficacy which includes
academic self-efficacy and therefore facilitates a range of usefully adaptive
behaviors. The relationship parents have with their children promotes lifelong
lessons in critical thinking and helps to develop the children’s self-efficacy. When
parents demonstrate close involvement in their children’s education and provide
academic and emotional encouragement, the children value their support and
lead to student wellbeing (Arnett, 2000; Harper, Sax & Wolf, 2012; Román,
Cuestas & Fenollar; 2008).

One correlational study by Niazi et al. (2022), stated that parental bonding
is a component which is vital for acquiring a positive attitude and better academic
performance among students. The analysis revealed that self-regulation,
proactive attitude and academic performance are highly correlated significantly
with parental bonding in university students. However, in terms of the predictors,
it was shown that parental bonding only predicts self-regulation and proactive
attitude of the students except for academic performance but still this aspect is
considered important for student success. This concludes that the positive
attitude of parents is determined to be remarkably associated with the academic
performance of students.

Locally, a study by Granada and Luzano (2023), conducted at five

different elementary schools in Gingoog city with a total of 137 respondents.
 12

Results revealed that learners have a high level of family support, as well as
academic and school support and also constant mental, emotional, and financial
support. In addition, the students' general academic achievement is adequate.
Additionally, this suggests that there is a strong correlation between students'
academic success and family support. Therefore, family support must be
established and strengthened as a foundation for students to attain successful
academic results when progressing onto high school and eventually to university.

Peers as a Support System

Peer support refers to the assistance and encouragement that students

provide to one another, encompassing emotional, academic, and social support.
This collaborative dynamic is crucial in academic settings as it fosters a sense of
community, improves learning outcomes, and contributes to students’ overall
well-being. Specifically, peer support can take various forms, such as peer
tutoring, mentoring, and study groups, which all can improve the overall students’
academic performance (Wiredufred, 2024).

Furthermore, research consistently demonstrated that having a positive

relationship with peers can be good academic support in various educational
settings, such as in solving academic problems and being a good academic
encouragement (Kaynak et al., n.d.). A study conducted by Worley et al. (2023)
aims to investigate the longitudinal associations between peer support, academic
competence, and anxiety among U.S. college students found that students who
frequently discussed their challenges and felt supported by their peers in their
sophomore year tended to have higher self-perceptions of their academic abilities
in their senior year. This suggests that peers play a vital role in developing
students’ self-confidence, especially in academic settings.

Moreover, According to the study conducted by Oduwaye et al. (2024),

peer support programs offer numerous benefits. These programs have been
 13

linked to reduced stress and anxiety, improved self-esteem, and provide a more
positive learning environment. Additionally, a recent study conducted by Shao et
al. (2024) found that peer relationships are directly related to academic
achievement among junior high school students. The study demonstrated that
positive peer interactions enhance learning motivation and engagement, which in
turn leads to improved academic performance. Specifically, the path from peer
relationships to learning motivation was identified as having the strongest indirect
effect on academic achievement.

Similarly, a study about the effectiveness of Peer-to-Peer support that

was conducted by Idris (2024) at the Mindanao State University-Sulu revealed
that the majority of respondents agreed on the effectiveness of peer support
mechanisms in enhancing their academic performance. Specifically, there was a
significant positive correlation among the sub-categories of peer support,
indicating that engaging in study groups and mentoring positively influenced
students’ academic outcomes.

Spirituality and Academic Performance

Student engagement is essential for academic success. It reflects a

learner's active participation, motivation, and dedication to the educational
process. Initial interviews with active students from Universitas Muhammadiyah
Magelang’s (2022) cohort highlight a notable struggle with maintaining
engagement, marked by inattentiveness, sleepiness, and procrastination.
Although students acknowledge the importance of engagement for better
academic performance and effective peer communication, factors such as
spirituality, achievement motivation, and resilience emerge as influential in
shaping their involvement (Kenia & Uyun, 2023; Gnanaprakash, 2013; Utami,
2020). Spirituality, in particular, has been associated with greater academic
control, as it fosters a value-based learning environment and ethical practices
 14

that strengthen students’ mental resilience and commitment (Saputra, 2020;

Rahmawati, 2014).

Research suggests a positive link between spirituality and student

motivation, with spiritually oriented students often displaying higher achievement
motivation (Gnanaprakash, 2013; Ahmed et al., 2020). Studies indicate that
spirituality supports not only academic motivation but also enhances life
satisfaction, stress management, and social connections (Heydari et al., 2020;
Utami, 2020). For instance, students with strong spiritual beliefs are better
equipped with coping strategies for academic and social challenges (Imron,
2018). By instilling gratitude and reducing materialistic tendencies, spirituality
contributes to a supportive environment for personal and academic growth,
positioning students to overcome obstacles and build resilience in their
educational journey (Utami, 2020).

While the terms “religion” and “spirituality" are often used interchangeably
(Pellebon & Anderson, 1999), recent attempts have been made to distinguish
these two overlapping constructs (Carroll, 1998). Primarily social religion is
typically understood to flow from spirituality, which is individual (Anderson &
Worthen, 1997; Carroll, 1998). Specifically, spirituality is generally conceptualized
as what Cascio (1999, p. 130) refers to as an “intrinsic phenomenon,” as a
personal, experiential connectedness with Transcendence or Ultimate Reality
that is expressed in one’s beliefs and behaviors. Religion tends to be
conceptualized as an external, community-based phenomena in which a
particular organized set of beliefs, behaviors, and rituals are institutionalized by
individuals sharing similar spiritualities (Canda, 1997; Canda & Furman, 1999;
Carroll, 1997; Carroll, 1998; Koenig et al., 2001; Miller, 1998; Zinnbauer et al.,
1997). For instance, Hodge (2001, p. 36) defines the two terms as follows:
“spirituality refers to an individual’s relationship with God (or perceived
Transcendence), while religion is defined as a particular set of beliefs, practices,
 15

and rituals that have been developed in the community by people who share
similar existential experiences of transcendent reality.”

However, given the theistic nature of the general public in the United
States (Gallup & Castelli, 1989; Gallup & Lindsay, 1999), it is understandable that
many scales mention God. Nevertheless, in an increasingly diverse society, there
are growing numbers of individuals who understand their spirituality in
non-theistic terms (Richards & Bergin, 1997). For such individuals, items that
refer to God may not be valid indicators of their spirituality. Indeed, social workers
exploring the importance of spirituality have called upon researchers to develop
instruments that are more culturally sensitive (Kamya, 1997). The measure of
intrinsic religion taps into a construct that might be referred to as spirituality as
assessed within the context of religion (Pargament, 1999).

More specifically, Allport and Ross (1967) theorized that intrinsic believers
live their religion and stand in contrast to people who use religion for their own
ends. For intrinsics, their religion, which typically posits some type of
connectedness with Transcendence as the central theme, provides the “master
motive” for life, directing their thoughts and actions (Allport & Ross, 1967, p. 434).
Because their internalized faith provides the central motivation for life, extrinsic
factors, such as the degree of support they encounter in religiously-based
institutional settings, are less significant as motivating influences in their lives. In
other words, the measure can be seen as tapping the level of internalized,
spiritual commitment of those individuals who express their spirituality within a
religious framework (Burris, 1999). Internalized faith provides the central
motivation for life, extrinsic factors, such as the degree of support they encounter
in religiously-based institutional settings, are less significant as motivating
influences in their lives. In other words, the measure can be seen as tapping the
level of internalized, spiritual commitment of those individuals who express their
spirituality within a religious framework (Burris, 1999).
 16

Study Approach and Academic Performance

Academic performance is a primary measure of educational quality in

universities, reflecting the success and effectiveness of their programs (Ahmed et
al., 2020; Aramideh et al., 2017). This performance is shaped by various factors,
including study habits, which refer to individual behaviors related to studying
(Heydari et al., 2020). Study habits are the blend of techniques and skills that
promote effective learning by increasing motivation and optimizing the study
process, leading to enhanced comprehension and retention (Imron, 2018;
Gnanaprakash, 2013). This skill set encompasses any activity that aids in
understanding, problem-solving, or memorizing course material, serving as a
personal path to academic success, with habits differing among individuals
(Utami, 2020).

Previous research identifies several effective study habits, such as

studying in quiet environments, maintaining a daily study routine, turning off
distracting devices, taking notes, incorporating breaks, listening to soft
background music, using personalized learning styles, and prioritizing
challenging material (Saputra, 2020; Kenia & Uyun, 2023). Conversely, poor
study habits include procrastination, avoiding study sessions, studying in
unsuitable conditions, and exposure to loud music or television during study time
(Gnanaprakash, 2013). Global studies underscore that study habits are among
the strongest predictors of academic success, with effective habits especially
critical for students, like those in medical fields, who must process and apply vast
amounts of complex information (Utami, 2020; Saputra, 2020). Research
indicates that students who lack effective study strategies may struggle to attain
sustainable learning outcomes, resulting in lower academic achievement (Utami,
2020; Imron, 2018).

In approaching learning and students’ performance, The relationship

between students’ approaches to learning—specifically deep and surface
 17

approaches—and their academic performance has sparked considerable debate

within educational research. This controversy stems from inconsistent findings in
the literature regarding the strength and nature of these relationships. Some
studies provide robust evidence that deep approaches to learning, characterized
by meaningful engagement and critical analysis, are strongly associated with
better academic performance, while surface approaches, often marked by rote
memorization and minimal engagement, show little impact on performance (Cano
et al., 2018; Guo et al., 2017; Maciejewski & Merchant, 2016). Conversely, other
studies report that surface approaches are significantly detrimental to
performance, and the positive impact of deep approaches on achievement is less
pronounced or even negligible (Diseth et al., 2009; Nguyen, 2016; Zakariya et al.,
2021).

Further complicating this issue are studies that demonstrate either a

mixed relationship—where deep approaches benefit performance and surface
approaches hinder it—or no substantial link at all between these approaches and
academic outcomes (Gijbels et al., 2005; Herrmann et al., 2016; Mundia &
Metussin, 2019). This disparity suggests that variations in learning contexts may
play a key role in shaping these relationships such as other noncognitive factors .
Since learning approaches are context-dependent, instruments designed to
measure them may capture only the predominant learning behaviors within
specific educational environments. Thus, a context that fosters deep engagement
might yield a stronger positive relationship between deep learning such as
personal self regulation and other academic performances, whereas contexts
favoring surface learning may highlight its negative impact on academic success
(Lei, H., & Cui, Y. 2018, March)

Self-Regulation and Student Academic Success

Self-regulation focuses on individuals’ responsibility for their own learning,

control of their own learning processes, ability to adjust their learning process
 18

when necessary, and ability to motivate themselves throughout their learning

lives (Zimmerman, 2011). Students who can self-regulate can take control of their
learning processes by developing metacognitive strategies such as planning,
being organized and being motivated (Yukselturk & Bulut, 2007).

Moreover, studies show that self-regulation is critical for determining

students’ successful learning experiences in online learning environments (M.H.
Cho & Kim, 2013). It is known that students who can self-regulate are successful
in setting goals, planning, and monitoring their learning processes and in
evaluating these processes. It is expected that these students, who can manage
their time and learning resources effectively (Pintrich, 2004; B.J. Zimmerman,
2011), will have successful learning experiences in online lessons by using their
self-regulation skills for distance learning.

At the same time, self-regulated learning expresses students’ systematic

efforts toward managing their learning processes in order to achieve their goals
(Pintrich, 2004; B.J. Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011). Self-regulated learning is
generally explained in the context of integration of motivation, emotion, and
learning strategies (Abar & Loken, 2010). Regarding motivation, students who
possess self-regulation skills are disposed to gain competence by mastering the
work that they do (Pintrich, 2004; B.J. Zimmerman, 2011). The conducted studies
show that motivation, which is one of the components of self-regulation, and
emotion have a significant effect on students’ learning experiences such as
achievement, satisfaction, and passing or failing the course (M.H. Cho & Heron,
2015).

In some studies, an attempt has been made to explain the role of

motivation in self-regulated learning. Among these, M.H. Cho and Kim (2013)
revealed that students’ mastery goal orientations and their interaction in online
learning environments were positively correlated with their self-regulation.
Moreover, M.H. Cho and Shen (2013) also revealed that in nonsynchronous
 19

online learning environments, metacognitive self-regulation was not only

correlated with their learning and academic performance but was also positively
related to their self-efficacy.

Furthermore, Co and Colina (2024) conducted a study that aims to

explore how self-efficacy and self-regulation beliefs influence students’
persistence during the transition from the preparatory phase to the dentistry
program. It also sought to identify additional factors that contribute to students’
persistence. Four factors emerged regarding factors that influence persistence
which are Obedience to parents, personal dreams, social support, and positive
mindset. The findings indicate that self-regulation skills are essential for students
when facing challenges of a demanding program like dentistry. The study also
noted the importance of developing and understanding these factors that can
help educators and guidance counselors to design interventions that enhance
self-regulation and improve students’ mindset of their academic capabilities.

Student Mindsets and Academic Performance

Mindset is the underlying belief that influences individuals and helps them
shape their self-confidence, abilities, and intelligence (MSEd, 2024b). Carol
Dweck categorizes these beliefs into two primary types: Fixed mindset and
growth mindset. Students who have fixed mindsets are the type of students who
believe that their abilities are static, which leads them to avoid challenges and a
fear of failure. Contrary to this, Students who have a growth mindset are the type
of students who believe that their abilities can be developed through effort and
continuous learning, promoting resilience and a willingness to utilize criticism and
embrace challenges (Chen, 2024).

Subsequently, research has consistently demonstrated that a growth

mindset positively correlates with academic success. A recent study conducted
by Rojas et al. (2024) aimed to investigate how non-cognitive factors like growth
 20

mindset, self-efficacy, and grit affect student academic performance. They have
found that a growth mindset, self-efficacy, and grit are directly linked to better
academic performance. These results aligned with the study conducted by Zhao
et al. (2024b) which found that a growth mindset is crucial for overcoming
academic challenges and views setbacks as opportunities for growth. This also
encourages perseverance, boosts self-confidence, and motivates students to
strive for academic success.

Furthermore, interventions aimed at fostering a growth mindset have

shown a significant positive impact on student motivation and performance. A
study conducted by Yeasmin (2021) which intends to determine the effectiveness
of an intervention using a growth mindset on the academic performance of
elementary students shows that a growth mindset can indeed help students
achieve better academic results.

However, it is important to note that mindsets can evolve over time. Limeri
et al. (2020) found that students who faced academic challenges tended to
develop a more fixed mindset. Therefore, it is crucial to foster a growth mindset,
especially during challenging times, to maintain motivation and resilience. The
findings suggest a feedback loop where academic success reinforces a growth
mindset, while struggles can lead to a fixed mindset.

Relationship between Student Mindset and Self-Regulation

The relationship between student mindset and self-regulation is a critical

area of research in educational psychology, as both factors significantly influence
academic performance. Research indicates that negative interpretations of
accumulated effort can shift to motivational priorities, leading individuals to
withdraw effort, which increases the risk of self-regulatory failure. As a result,
cultivating a growth mindset, which has been shown to influence behavior in part
by changing effort attributions can be a promising way to maintain self-regulation.
 21

This approach has been shown to influence behavior by shifting effort

attributions, thereby encouraging students to persist in the face of challenges
(Mrazek et al., 2018). Recent studies have highlighted the intricate connections
between these constructs, demonstrating that they do not operate independently
but rather interact to shape students’ academic experiences.

Karlen et al. (2021) investigated the relationships between students’

mindsets and their self-concepts about self-regulated learning. The research
findings revealed that students with a growth mindset are more likely to engage
in adaptive self-regulatory behaviors, such as using effective learning strategies
and experiencing positive emotions like enjoyment during learning. Contrarily,
students with a fixed mindset may struggle with self-regulation, often leading to
feelings of boredom and disengagement. This study also emphasizes that
cultivating a growth mindset can enhance students’ self-regulatory skills,
ultimately contributing to better academic outcomes.

Similarly, Bai and Wang (2023) investigates the role of growth mindset,
self-efficacy, and intrinsic value in self-regulated learning (SRL) in English
language achievement. The findings suggest that students with a growth mindset
tend to use more effective learning strategies, such as monitoring their progress
and regulating their effort. This results in better English language learning
outcomes. The study highlights the importance of fostering a growth mindset in
students to improve their learning and academic performance.

Furthermore, Jiang et al. (2023) examined how growth mindset can

influence university students’ intention to engage in self-regulated learning during
the COVID-19 pandemic. The study found that having a growth mindset
positively impacts students’ intention to self-regulate their learning. This effect is
both direct and indirect, through factors like perceived behavioral control and
attitude. Additionally, a growth mindset can mediate the relationship between
perceived teacher support and students’ intention to self-regulate. Hence, the
 22

findings suggest that fostering a growth mindset can be beneficial for students,
especially amidst challenging learning environments like the pandemic. This can
help students develop effective self-regulated learning strategies and improve
academic outcomes.

1.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The study aims to determine the noncognitive factors affecting the

academic performance of freshmen and sophomore psychology students of
Caraga State University-Main Campus. For the purpose of ascertaining these
potential factors in future learner interventions and improving academic
performance.
Specific questions and objectives the researchers aim to answer are the
following:

1. Does Self-Regulation influence GWA?

2. Does Student Mindset influence GWA?
3. Does Student Factors mediate the influence of student Self-Regulation
towards GWA
4. Does Student Factors mediate the influence of Student Mindset towards
GWA
5. Does the data gathered fit the hypothesized model?

1.4 RESEARCH HYPOTHESES

The following hypotheses were generated based on each objective of the

study.

𝐻01: There is no significant relationship between Self-Regulation and GWA.

𝐻𝑎1: There is a significant relationship between Self-Regulation and GWA.

 23

𝐻02: There is no significant relationship between Student Mindset and GWA.

𝐻𝑎2: There is a significant positive relationship between Self-Regulation and

GWA.
𝐻03: Student Factors does not mediate the relationship between Self-Regulation
and GWA.
𝐻𝑎3: Student Factors mediate the relationship between Self-Regulation and
GWA.
𝐻04: Student Factors does not mediate the relationship between Student Mindset
and GWA.
𝐻𝑎4: Student Factors mediate the relationship between Student Mindset and
GWA.
𝐻05: The data gathered does not fit the hypothesized model.

𝐻𝑎5: The data gathered fits the hypothesized model.

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This study is conducted to provide valuable information and knowledge

regarding the effects of noncognitive factors and their effect on the student’s
General Weighted Average (GWA) and overall academic success. The findings
of this study will have significant implications for various groups, these include:

Students. This study will directly benefit the students at Caraga State
University-Main Campus by identifying the specific noncognitive factors that can
affect their academic success. The findings of this study can provide them insight
and awareness to take proactive steps on developing their noncognitive skills to
enhance their academic performance. Increasing school retention and
decreasing drop outs.

Parents and Guardians. Parents and Guardians will benefit from this
study by gaining a better understanding on how these noncognitive factors can
 24

affect their children's academic performance and take a more active and
informed role in their children’s education. Through this, they can tailor their
support to address their children’s specific needs.

Educational Institutions. This study will be valuable to educational

institutions, particularly Caraga State University-Main Campus, as this study
serves as a research-based framework for an informed development of targeted
interventions and support programs designed to enhance students' noncognitive
skills. By addressing the specific needs of students, educational institutions can
create more conducive learning environments that promote academic
achievement and overall student well-being. Additionally, the study can inform the
design of support services that address the specific needs of students based on
the identified strengths and weaknesses in these noncognitive factors.

Counselors. This study can supply counselors of students by providing

targeted counseling services to students. By identifying students' strengths and
weaknesses in noncognitive skills, counselors can offer personalized guidance
and support to help students develop the skills they need to succeed
academically and personally.

Future Researchers. This study contributes to the existing body of

research, as this helps future researchers and other academic institutions in
studying noncognitive factors and their effect on the student’s academic
performance. The findings of this study can be replicated, extended, and
investigated through a deeper lens to provide a more comprehensive
understanding of the relationship between noncognitive factors and academic
success. Furthermore, this study can also contribute to the development and
refinement of a theoretical framework that explains the complex interplay
between these variables in a Philippine context. Moreover, the research methods
in this study, such as the data collection techniques and statistical analysis can
serve as a model for future researchers that aim to investigate in this area.
 25

1.6 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The scope of this study is to investigate the influence of noncognitive

factors that are believed to have a significant impact on the overall academic
performance of the students at Caraga State University-Main Campus. It will
focus on understanding the relationship between these noncognitive
factors—including Time Management, Peer Support, Study Techniques, Family
Support, Spirituality, Self-Regulation, and Student Motivation and their impact on
the student’s Grade Weighted Average (GWA) and overall academic success.

However, this study will only be limited to the freshmen and sophomore
Bachelor of Science in Psychology students of Caraga State University-Main
Campus, Ampayon, Butuan City, Agusan Del Norte, Philippines, S.Y. 2024-2025;
which may not fully represent the experiences of students from other year levels
and other programs within and outside the institution. These relatively specific
samples may restrict the generalizability of the findings to the broader student
population. Furthermore, the reliance on self-reported surveys may be
susceptible to bias, such as the potential of students’ answers being influenced
by personal perception and their desire to present themselves in a positive or
negative light. The time constraints in data collection which is only limited to one
academic term might not provide a comprehensive view of the long-term effects
of these noncognitive factors—which are Time Management, Peer Support,
Study Techniques, Family Support, Spirituality, Self-Regulation, and Students
Motivation on the students’ General Weighted Average (GWA) and overall
academic success. Additionally, with the given ensemble of variables, the survey
is ultimately considered as a test battery and may cause respondent-fatigue and
the data gathered could be jeopardized. Finally, this study is confined to Caraga
State University-Main Campus located at Ampayon, Butuan City, Agusan Del
Norte, Philippines, hence, Cultural and Regional factors specific to this area may
influence the findings and limit the applicability to students in other regions and
countries.
 26

1.7 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The study mainly integrates the theory of Self-Determination Theory

(SDT) developed in 1918 by Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan in explaining
the relationship between noncognitive factors of undergraduate students’
academic performance where the application of the theory on the education
aspect, SDT can be readily integrated into studies about learner motivation
(Guay, 2021). Additionally, the study also integrates the Mindset Theory
developed by Carol Dweck in 1970, where the mindset a learner possesses can
influence crucial psychological and behavioral factors such as a student’s
reaction to failure, persistence and level of exerted effort, and success
expectations, where it ultimately influences academic performance (Kapasi,
2021); and also the Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) Theory by Barry Zimmerman
in 1986 where expert learners demonstrate strong self-regulatory skills,
particularly during the initial phases of learning. As these students employ
effective forethought processes like setting specific goals and selecting
appropriate strategies which all lead to more positive outcomes (Mammadov &
Schroeder, 2023). The latter two theories help to support the potential
relationship between Student Mindset and Self-Regulation, and both of its direct
influence on Student Factors and Academic Performance.

Mindset Theory

The Theory of Mindset by Dweck (1988) discusses the primary

assumptions about the malleability of personal qualities rooted in a
social-cognitive approach. According to Dweck (1988), learners have two kinds of
mindsets about their own intelligence: fixed mindset and growth mindset.

Growth Mindset is defined as a student’s belief that their abilities and

intelligence can be developed through dedication and effort to work. These
students view challenges as an opportunity to learn and grow, embracing
 27

setbacks as stepping stones to improvement. Fixed Mindset, on the other hand,

is defined as the student’s belief that abilities and intelligence are fixed traits.
Where their view often leads them to oftenly avoid challenges, fearing failure
might expose their limitations. Moreover, these students also feel discouraged by
setbacks and are prone to give up easily (Elliott & Dweck, 1988).

Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) Theory

A critical aspect of academic learning involves self-regulated learning.

Zimmermarman’s (1989) theory of Self-Regulated Learning (SLR) posits the
assumption that learners need to utilize cognitive and metacognitive strategies in
controlling and regulating their learning effectively. These strategies or skills
typically consist of goal setting, planning, learning strategies, self-reinforcement,
self-recording, and self-instruction (Zimmerman, 2015). Unlike traditional passive
learning, self-regulated learning empowers students to actively engage with
learning material and adapt their learning strategies as needed. This approach is
not limited to individual studying, but can also involve social interactions and
collaborative learning (Zimmerman, 2015). The SLR model identifies three
phases of self-regulated learning: the forethought phase, performance phase,
and self-reflection phase.

The Forethought Phase is defined as the initial phase of learning where

students set goals for themselves, assess their motivation and abilities to
complete given tasks, and create plans in executing the tasks. The Performance
Phase is defined as the next phase of learning where students focus their
attention, engage in their tasks, develop and apply generated strategies, and
monitor their progress altogether. Lastly, the Self-Reflection Phase is defined as
the last phase in learning where students reflect on the accomplished task and
their performance through self-evaluation. After which, the cycle is repeated
when another task arises (Zimmerman, 2015).
 28

Self-Determination Theory (SDT)

The Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is a macro-theory of human

motivation and personality that differentiates motivation as either autonomous or
controlled. This theory has been utilized to guide and interpret research on a
variety of issues, such as motivation and wellness across cultures, close
relationships, the enhancement and depletion of energy and vitality, and the roles
of mindful awareness and nonconscious processes in behavioral regulation.
While much of SDT was developed through laboratory experiments, it is also
supported by extensive applied research, including field studies and clinical trials,
that addresses significant social concerns. This work spans a range of domains,
including health behavior change, education, psychotherapy, work motivation,
sport and exercise, and prosocial behaviors (Deci & Ryan, 2000, 2012).
According to the theory, students have three key psychological needs: autonomy,
competence, and relatedness.

Autonomy refers to an individual's sense of volition and willingness to

engage in one’s behavior. Competence refers to the experience of proficiency
and effectiveness in one's activities. Lastly, Relatedness refers to the need to feel
connected and a sense of belonging with others. Deci and Ryan (2000, 2012)
posits that by having these three psychological needs be properly achieved, this
facilitates learner motivation.

1.8 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The researchers brainstormed on potential noncognitive factors that may

affect academic performance of college students based on literature and the
theoretical framework. This led to a proposed hypothesized model of the interplay
between the variables as illustrated below in Figure 1. With the latent or
mediating variable being Student Factors that consists of Study Approaches,
Time Management, Family Support, Peer Support, and Spirituality. These five
 29

variables are considered the independent variables along with Self-Regulation

and Student Mindset, all which represent the Noncognitive Factors. Specifically,
Self-Regulation and Student Mindset have a hypothesized covariance with each
other as these two variables also have a direct impact on the latent variable. With
General Weighted Average (GWA) being the dependent variable representing
Academic Performance.

Figure 1. Hypothesized Model of the relationship among Self-Regulation, Student

Mindset, Student Factors, and GWA

1.9 OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF TERMS

The following are the constructs, variables, psychology jargon, and terms
mentioned in this study and are operationally defined as follows:

Noncognitive Factors. refers to personal characteristics, traits and attitudes that

influence academic performance, beyond cognitive abilities such as intelligence
and knowledge. Examples include motivation, self-efficacy, resilience and social
skills.
 30

Academic Performance. encompasses students' achievement and

accomplishment in their studies, typically measured through grades, GPA or
standardized test scores.

Time Management. refers to the ability to plan, organize and prioritize tasks
effectively to maximize productivity and efficiency, particularly in academic
contexts.

Peer Support. fosters academic motivation, emotional well-being and mutual

encouragement among students.

Family Support. encompasses parental involvement, encouragement and

resources that promote students' academic success and emotional well-being.

Study Approaches. involve strategies for learning, processing and retaining

information.

Spirituality. encompasses personal beliefs, values and connections influencing

emotional resilience and purpose.

Self Regulation. manages thoughts, feelings and behaviors for academic goals.

Student Mindset. involves beliefs, attitudes and perceptions about intelligence,

ability and potential.

General Weighted Average (GWA). measures academic performance by

assigning weights to grades in various subjects.

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). A statistical technique used to analyze

complex relationships among observed variables and latent variables. It
integrates elements of confirmatory factor analysis and path analysis, allowing
 31

researchers to test hypotheses about casual relationships within a unified

framework.
 CHAPTER II
METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the study's methodological approach; including

the research design used, the research locale, the demographic information of
the target participants and the technique in attaining the sample size, the
description of the test instruments, the data gathering procedure, the analysis of
collected data, and the ethical considerations in collecting the data.

2.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

The study will employ an Ex Post Facto Research Design to effectively

assess the objectives of the study. Given the hypothetical nature of the model
proposed by the researchers, such as the collection of noncognitive factors with
sparse literature supporting the ensemble of variables proposed, a research
design aimed at investigating the cause-and-effect relationship between the
independent variables and the dependent variable is deemed appropriate as the
hypothesized model will undergo a revision based on the future data collected.

Better known as Causal-Comparative Research Design, Saleh &

Kowalczyk (2023) defines this research approach as a non-experimental
research method aimed at examining how independent variables affect a
dependent variable. There is no direct manipulation of the independent variable
as the presumed “cause” has already occurred. This being the noncognitive
factors already consistent within the participants. This research design allows for
the study of naturally occurring phenomena, providing insights into real-world
situations. This also allows exploration of complex relationships between multiple
variables that might not be feasible in experimental designs. This is particularly
useful in conducting a Structural Equation Analysis as the hypothesized model
must undergo a model fit assessment based on the data gathered where a more
 33

statistically-sound structural equation model will be the product in ascertaining

the relationships between noncognitive factors and academic performance.

Stone (2021) defines Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) as a statistical

tool that allows researchers to analyze data in ways that are impossible under the
general linear models of other studies. This provides researchers with
simultaneous assessment of multiple relationships across variables or measuring
variables that cannot be directly observed, also called latent variables. The
process starts with a hypothesized model, data is then collected, and then
researchers are tasked to test the model’s fit to the collected data based on fit
indices which are statistics collected that quantify the degree of data-model fit.

2.2 RESEARCH LOCALE

This study will be conducted at Caraga State University (CSU) Main

Campus, established in 1946, a state-controlled university specifically located at
Km 7, National Highway, Ampayon Campus National Highway Butuan City,
Agusan Del Norte, Philippines, 8600. Specifically, the data gathering will be
conducted at Kinaadman Hall.

2.3 RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS

The targeted participants of the study are the freshmen and sophomore
psychology students of Caraga State University-Main Campus. The participants
were selected based on the following criteria: (a) enrolled as full-time students of
Caraga State University-Main Campus, (b) currently either a first (freshmen) or
second (sophomore) year student enrolled in the Bachelor of Science in
Psychology program, (c) enrolled in the second semester, A.Y. 2024-2025.

The purpose of only inclusively focusing on freshmen and sophomore

students, specifically psychology students, is to ascertain factors that may affect
their academic performance in the early stages of their undergraduate journey.
 34

Based on the university website, the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC)

named the pioneering batch of CSU’s BS Psychology as the 5th top-performing
school in the Philippines in the Board Licensure Examination for Psychologists
and Psychometricians (BLEPP) last August 2023. With 61 out of 66 passers,
attaining a 92.42% passing rate for its first-time takers which put the university as
the leading school in Visayas and Mindanao that year. The following year marked
the second pioneering batch of the program which yielded an 82.28% passing
rate with 65 out of 79 passers last August 2024 (Caraga State University, 2023;
Caraga State University, 2024).

Thus, early interventions are tantamount to producing increased student

academic performance (Scott, 2024) that will ultimately lead to a potential
increase in future BLEPP passing rates for the university. Moreover, the main
purpose of early interventions would also lead to student retention and increased
academic success. But the first step in providing an intervention would be to
identify the factors that affect academic performance, where the study proposes
these factors to be noncognitive variables. Not as a stand-alone factor, but will be
used in conjunction with cognitive factors (Molnár & Kocsis, 2023) in generating a
potential detailed intervention for future psychology Caraga State University-Main
Campus graduates.

2.4 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE

The study will employ a total population sampling technique in selecting

the participants where the entire population of the freshmen (N = 149) and
sophomore (N = 145) psychology students of Caraga State University-Main
Campus are encouraged to participate in the study. With N = 294 as the total
population size of the study’s participants. This was with consideration of the
potentiality of participants withdrawing from the study, along with the small
population of budding psychology students, which also provides a reduced risk of
 35

missing potential insights from members of the population that would not have
been included in the sample (Canonizado, 2024).

2.5 DATA GATHERING PROCEDURE

Prior to the data collection proper, the researchers will first send a letter of
intent to obtain an approval of the current Chairperson of the Department of
Psychology at Caraga State University-Main Campus, A.Y. 2024-2025, for the
permission to conduct the research study. This ensures institutional support and
compliance with the university's research protocols.

The researchers will utilize survey questionnaires for each independent

variable designated to measure the noncognitive factors of the participants. The
questionnaire is made up of three main parts: the first part will detail a brief
description of the study, its objectives, and an informed consent to which
participants are given the option to withdraw at any moment during the study. The
second part consists of the demographic profile of the participants; such as their
age bracket, sex, year, and the GWA in their first semester. The last part will
include all the standardized tests that aim to measure each noncognitive variable.
As an added precaution, the researchers will employ two identifier items
randomly inserted between the items of a questionnaire that will instruct the
participants to select a specific rating. This is done to spot biases in the data,
where participants will complete the survey by randomly or deliberately choosing
the best or worst rating. This will also identify participants that are only guessing
the ratings. These precautionary steps will help to provide the data with more
reliability as it suggests that the participants are actively engaged in the data
gathering.

The survey will be administered using a blend of Google Forms and paper
and pencil format, depending on the participants based on their preference or
availability. Utmost confidentiality will be facilitated, with the physical data
 36

gathered being stored securely in a safe location to be manually encoded into

softcopies for data analysis. The data gathered through Google Forms are
automatically stored in a single Google Spreadsheet where the only persons with
access are the researchers. The data collection is projected to be scheduled over
a span of one month starting January 2025 to February 2025.

The researchers will conduct a thorough analysis of the quantifiable data

to be collected, using the statistical software called JASP, a free and open-source
program for statistical analysis (JASP Team, 2024). The study will also assess
the model fit of the hypothesized structural equation model between the variables
of noncognitive factors and academic performance. This will be executed on the
21st version of AMOS (Arbuckle, 2012). All physical data will be burned and all
digital data will be deleted after the study is complete to prevent confidential data
being leaked or unlawfully accessed in the future.

2.6 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS

The study will utilize a total of six research instruments in attaining the
level of the seven variables mentioned in the study, all of which were either
free-for-use or were granted permission by the author/developer of the
instrument. Namely, the study will utilize the Dweck Mindset Instrument (DMI)
developed by Carol Dweck in 2006 to measure Student Mindset; Brief
Self-Control Scale (BSCS) developed by June Tangney, Roy Baumeister, and
Angie Boone in 2004 to measure Self-Regulation; Short Form of Revised Study
Process Questionnaire (SF-R-SPQ-2F) developed by Yusuf Zakariya and
Barattucci Massimiliano in 2022 to measure Study Approaches; Structure Of
Student Time Management Scale (STMS) developed by Balamurugan in 2013 to
measure Time Management; Multidimensional Social Support Scale (MSPSS)
developed by Gregory Zimet, Nancy Dahlem, Sara Zimet, and Gordon Farley in
1988 to measure Family Support and Peer Support, respectively; and Intrinsic
 37

Spirituality Scale (ISS) developed by David Hodge in 2003 to measure

Spirituality.

Dweck Mindset Instrument (DMI)

Developed by Carol Dweck in 2006, this self-report questionnaire is used

to measure how students perceive their own intelligence and talent. The DMI
contains 16 items that utilizes a 6-point likert scale format, where test takers will
rate their level of agreement with each statement ranging from “Strongly Agree”
(1) to “Strongly Disagree” (6). The DMI contains both fixed mindset statements
and growth mindset statements. Where the first eight statements refer to
intelligence and the latter eight statements refer to talent as factors being either
malleable or not. The scores from the growth mindset items are reversed, and
the scores for intelligence and talent are averaged separately. Dweck's mindset
theory distinguishes between fixed and growth mindsets based on people's
beliefs about intelligence where Fixed Mindset is the belief that abilities are
innate and unchangeable and Growth Mindset is the belief that abilities can be
developed through effort and learning (Dweck, 2006). The psychometric
properties of the Dweck Mindset Instrument (DMI) indicate that while it
demonstrates good internal reliability, with a coefficient of α = 0.87, suggesting
that the items consistently measure the intended construct of mindset.

Brief Self-Control Scale (BSCS)

Developed by June Tangney, Roy Baumeister, and Angie Boone in 2004,

this self-report questionnaire is used to measure general trait self-control (TSC),
defined as an individual’s capacity to override or change their inner responses,
as well as to override undesired behavioral tendencies and to refrain from acting
on them (Tangney, Baumeister, & Boone, 2004). The BSCS contains 13 items
that utilizes a 5-point likert scale format, where test takers will rate their level of
agreement with each statement ranging from “Not At All” (1) to “Very Much” (5).
 38

The total score will be calculated from the sum of the raw scores from each item.
The BSCS was highly reliable (alpha=.83 and .85 in two studies by the same
authors). In addition, the scale had a good test‐retest reliability at .87.

Short Form of Revised Study Process Questionnaire (SF-R-SPQ-2F)

Developed by Yusuf Zakariya and Barattucci Massimiliano in 2022, this

self-report questionnaire is used to measure students’ approaches to learning
(AL), specifically two categories of approaches. First is the Deep Approach to
learning where it is characterized by adopting strategies used by students that
are intrinsically motivated in engaging with presented tasks. Second is the
Surface Approach to learning where it is characterized by adopting strategies
used by students that are extrinsically motivated in engaging with the task
(Zakariya & Massimiliano, 2022). The SF-R-SPQ-2F contains 8 items that utilizes
a 5-point likert scale format, where test takers will rate their level of agreement
with each statement ranging from “Never or Only Rarely” (1) to “Always or Almost
Always” (5). Test takers’ scores on four items relate to deep approaches of
learning whereas the remaining four items relate to surface approaches to
learning. The scale has an excellent global fit, satisfied configural invariance from
the two samples it was used to test its psychometric properties. The
SF-R-SPQ-2F dimensions' reliability coefficients, as determined utilizing the
omega coefficient, show a high degree of internal consistency between the
Norwegian and Italian groups. Strong reliability for the individual items is
indicated by utilizing the omega coefficients for the deep learning approaches,
which vary from 0.572 to 0.755 in Norway and from 0.688 to 0.823 in Italy. In a
similar vein, the omega coefficients for surface approaches to learning fall
between 0.557 and 0.779 in Norway and between 0.694 and 0.747 in Italy.
According to these results, the SF-R-SPQ-2 F is a valid tool for assessing how
students approach learning and successfully captures the desired constructs in a
variety of cultural situations.
 39

Structure Of Student Time Management Scale (STMS)

Developed by Dr. Balamurugan, The Student Time Management Scale

(STMS) is designed to measure the time management skills of students, giving
insights into their ability to effectively organize and prioritize their activities. The
scale has 28 items that are structured to evaluate four key sub-scales, each
representing a distinct aspect of time management. Scheduling & Prioritizing
assesses how well students allocate their time to various activities based on
importance and deadlines. Planning & Goal Setting examines the ability to outline
steps necessary for completing tasks and reaching academic objectives.
Reviewing & Record Keeping emphasizes the importance of reflection and
documentation in managing time effectively. Lastly, Organizing & Controlling
which looks at their ability to manage distractions and maintain focus on tasks.
The scale exhibits strong psychometric properties, demonstrating high reliability
and validity. The scale's overall reliability is confirmed by a Cronbach's Alpha
coefficient of 0.885, indicating excellent internal consistency. Additional reliability
measures, including Spearman-Brown split-half reliability (0.842) and Guttman
split-half reliability (0.840), further support its consistency across items. Validity is
established through a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling
Adequacy of 0.899, which indicates the appropriateness of the sample for factor
analysis, alongside significant results from Bartlett's Test of Sphericity (Approx.
Chi-Square value of 3.307E3 at the 0.001 level). After obtaining the responses,
they were scored. For the positive statements, 'Strongly Agree' response was
awarded six points, 'Agree' was awarded five points, 'Seldom Agree' was
awarded four points, 'Seldom Disagree' was awarded three points, 'Disagree'
was awarded two points and 'Strongly Disagree' was awarded one point. For the
negative statements, the scoring procedure was reversed. There are 15 negative
statements i.e. statements 5, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 26, 27, 31, 38
and 42, rest of all the statements are positive in nature.
 40

Multidimensional Social Support Scale (MSPSS)

Developed by Gregory Zimet, Nancy Dahlem, Sara Zimet, and Gordon

Farley in 1988, this self-report questionnaire measures the perceived social
support and relationship the test taker has with their friends, family, and
significant other (Zimet et al., 1988). MSPSS contains 12 items that utilizes a
7-point likert scale format, where test takers will rate their level of agreement with
each statement ranging from “Very Strongly Disagree” (1) to “Very Strongly
Agree” (7). It is required to sum across all 12 items to determine the score as this
represents the test takers’ perceived social support. However, in satisfying the
objectives of this study and the lack therein of available questionnaires that
specifically targets peer and family support separately, the researchers will omit
one subscale (Significant Other) and retain the two other subscales (Family and
Friend). Where each subscale had four items each, the research instrument to be
used during the data gathering will only contain 9 items for this questionnaire.
Zimet et al. (1990) extended the already psychometrically sound instrument
where they demonstrated a strong internal reliability, factorial validity, and
subscale validity using three different subject groups. The coefficient alpha
values ranged from .81 to .90 for the Family subscale, from .90 to .94 for the
Friends subscale, from .83 to .98 for the Significant Other subscale, and from .84
to .92 for the scale as a whole.

Intrinsic Spirituality Scale (ISS)

Developed by David R. Hodge, The Intrinsic Spirituality Scale is a six-item

instrument designed to assess the salience of spirituality as a motivational
construct, distinguishing it from religious measures. The scale aims to capture
the essence of spirituality in both theistic and non-theistic contexts, providing a
more inclusive approach to understanding spiritual experiences. Each item is
formulated to reflect various dimensions of spirituality without explicitly
referencing religion, thus enhancing its applicability across diverse populations.
 41

Respondents rate their agreement with each item using an eleven-point response
scale, which ranges from zero (indicating that spirituality answers no questions
about life) to ten (indicating that spirituality answers all questions about life). The
scale has strong psychometric properties, including high validity and reliability.
Validity coefficients for the scale ranged from 1.27 to 2.36 times higher than the
measurement error, with a mean validity coefficient of 1.74, suggesting that the
scale accurately captures the construct of spirituality. Additionally, the scale
exhibits high reliability, with a mean reliability coefficient of .80 with a Cronbach’s
Alpha of .96, indicating excellent internal consistency. While the scale is primarily
unidimensional, it effectively captures the multifaceted nature of spirituality,
making it a valuable tool for researchers and practitioners interested in
understanding the role of spirituality in individuals' lives. Scoring the scale
involves summing the responses to the six items, each rated on an eleven-point
scale ranging from zero to ten. A higher total score indicates a greater degree of
intrinsic spirituality, reflecting the extent to which spirituality serves as a
motivational influence in an individual's life.

2.7 DATA ANALYSIS

The researchers will conduct a thorough analysis of the data to be

collected, using the statistical software called JASP. Named after Sir Harold
Jeffrey, where JASP stands for Jeffrey’s Amazing Statistics Program, this is a
free and open-source program for statistical analysis supported by the University
of Amsterdam (JASP Team, 2024). The study will also utilize Structural Equation
Modeling (SEM) in testing the hypothesized relationships between the
noncognitive factors (Study Approach, Time Management, Peer Support, Family
Support, Spirituality, Student Mindset, and Self-Regulation) and the academic
performance (GWA) of freshmen and sophomore psychology students of Caraga
State University-Main Campus. The AMOS version 21 will be used for performing
the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (Arbuckle, 2012) in assessing the fit indices to
ascertain the overall model fit (Stone, 2021).
 42

2.8 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Conducting research involving human participants necessitates careful

consideration of ethical principles to ensure their well-being and protect their
rights. Applying the APA Code of Ethics (2017) to this study on determining the
noncognitive factors that affects academic performance of freshmen and
sophomore psychology students of Caraga State University-Main Campus
require attention to several key areas:

1. Informed Consent (Principles A & E; Standards 3.10, 8.01, 8.02, 8.04, 8.05, &
9.03)

Ensure participants understand the study's purpose, procedures, potential

risks and benefits, and their right to withdraw at any time. Use clear and concise
language appropriate for students of all year levels. Obtain written informed
consent from each participant, or from a parent/guardian if participants are
minors.

2. Minimizing Harm (Principle A; Sections 8.04 & 8.07)

Choose the safest and most ethical methodologies for data collection.
Minimize potential risks of emotional distress, social stigma, or academic
consequences associated with participation. Develop contingency plans to
address any potential harm that might arise.

3. Deception and Honesty (Principle C; Sections 3.04, 3.06, 5.01, 8.05, 8.07, &
8.10)

Avoid any intentional deception or misrepresentation of the study's purpose

or procedures. Be transparent about the nature of the intervention as its role in
 43

the research. Ensure participants understand how their data will be used and
protected.

4. Confidentiality and Privacy (Principles B & E; Sections 4.01, 4.02, 4.05, 4.07,
6.02, 8.07, & 9.11)

Maintain strict confidentiality of participants’ data, including names,

responses, and identifying information. Facilitating utmost protection of the
participants’ responses and only compromising privacy of the participants to the
extent necessary for legitimate research goals. Anonymize or pseudonymised
data whenever possible. Store data securely and follow institutional data
protection regulations. After the study proper is completed, the data collected
(whether softcopy or written) will be destroyed. All unmentioned necessary steps
to ensure confidentiality and privacy of the participants and data will also be
enacted in accordance with the Data Privacy Act of 2012 (R.A. 10173).

5. Respect for Persons (Principle E; Sections 3.01, 8.01, 8.02, 8.03, 8.07, &
9.06)

Treat all participants with respect and dignity, regardless of their background,
gender identities, abilities, or performance in the data collection. Avoid biased or
discriminatory practices in selecting or treating participants. Offer support and
resources to participants who experience any discomfort or negative effects
during the research. The data and interpretations garnered in the study will avoid
any if all potential discriminatory or derogatory connotations to any or all students
of different backgrounds cited in the study.

6. Professional Competence and Ethical Standards (Principles B & C; Sections

2.01, 2.02, 8.10, 8.12, 8.14, & 9.02)
 44

Ensure research methods and data analysis techniques adhere to valid and
reliable scientific principles. Seek consultation or collaborate with relevant
experts if needed to maintain ethical research practices. Avoid personal biases
or conflicts of interest that might influence the study's design or outcomes. The
researchers also acknowledged and credited the literature and research
instruments used in the study.

7. Dissemination of Research Results (Principles C & E; Sections 8.07, 8.10,

8.15, 9.04, & 9.10)

Report research findings accurately and objectively, without distorting or

manipulating data. Acknowledge limitations and potential biases of the study.
Share research findings in a way that benefits respondents and contributes to
scientific knowledge.
 45

REFERENCES

Adams, R. V., & Blair, E. (2019b). Impact of time management behaviors on

undergraduate engineering students’ performance. SAGE Open, 9(1),
215824401882450. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018824506
Adriano, L. (2021). Non-cognitive skills and student perception of importance
[Thesis and Dissertations]. Rowan University.
Agarwal, A., & Arya, H. (2021). Role of non cognitive skills in academic
performance.
Ahmad, S., Batool, A., & Choudhry, A. (2019). Path relationship of time
management and academic achievement of students in distance learning
institutions.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Path-Relationship-of-Time-Manag
ement-and-Academic-Ahmad-Batool/a1b46af87a5ad54598b198e45cd75
4cd87b309d2
Allport, G. W., & Ross, M. J. (1967). Personal religious orientation and
prejudice.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,5(4), 432-443
Ahmed, M. A., Hashim, S., & Yaacob, N. R. N. (2020). Islamic spirituality,
resilience and achievement motivation of Yemeni refugee students:
A proposed conceptual framework. International Journal of Learning,
Teaching and Educational Research, 19(4), 322-342.
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.19.4.19
Amadi, J., Poblete III, R., Obong, G., Irodi, C. C., & Irodi, N. C. (2022). Cognitive
and Non-Cognitive Determinants of Academic Performance in Nursing.
International Journal of Public Health, Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 8(4).
https://eajournals.org/ijphpp/wp-content/uploads/sites/82/2023/09/Cognitiv
e-and-Non-Cognitive.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists
and code of conduct (2002, amended effective June 1, 2010, and January
1, 2017). https://www.apa.org/ethics/code/
 46

Anderson, D., & Worthen, D. (1997). Exploring a fourth dimension: Spirituality as

a resource for the couple therapist. Journal of Marital and Family
Therapy,23(1),3-12
Arbuckle, J. (2014). Amos (Version 23.0) [Computer Program]. Chicago, IL: IBM
SPSS.
Arora, N., & Singh, N. (2017). Factors affecting the academic performance of
college students. I-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1),
47. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.1.13586
ASEAN Secretariat. (2022). ASEAN Education Sector: Trends and Challenges.
Bai, B., & Wang, J. (2023). The Role of Growth Mindset, Self-Efficacy and
Intrinsic Value in Self-Regulated Learning and English Language Learning
Achievements. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1360411
Balamurugan, M. (2013). Structure of Student Time Management Scale (STMS).
I-manager S Journal on School Educational Technology, 8(4), 22–28.
https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.8.4.2248
Barnacha, L. M., De La Cruz, M. G., Orpilla, A. J., Palor, M. E., Pariñas, R., &
Marquez, J. (2022). Predictive Validity Of Undergraduates’ General
Weighted Average On Licensure Examination For Certified Public
Accountants Subjects To LECPA Results. Accountancy, Business and
Hospitality Research Bulletin, 10.
Bate, G., Velos, S., Gimena, G., & Go, M. (2022). Influence of IQ and Personality
on College Students' Academic Performance In A Philippine State
University. Journal of Positive School of Psychology, 6(4), 5876-5882.
Bernecker, K. & Job, V. (2019). Mindset Theory. Researchgate.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13788-5_12
Brandt, C. (2020). MEASURING STUDENT SUCCESS SKILLS: A REVIEW OF
THE LITERATURE ON SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING. Center for
Assessment.
Brenner, C. (2022) Self-regulated learning, self-determination theory and teacher
candidates’ development of competency-based teaching practices. Smart
Learn. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-021-00184-5
 47

Burris, C. T. (1999). Religious orientation scale (Allport & Ross, 1967). In P. C.

Hill &R. W. Hood Jr. (Eds.), Measures of religiosity (pp. 144-154).
Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press.
Cabalquinto, K., Magallanes, A. (2022). Non-Cognitive Factors Affecting
Mathematics Performance Using Structural Equation Modeling: Basis for
a Mathematics Learning Intervention Framework. Asian Journal of
Education and Social Studies, 36(3), 43–55.
https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2022/v36i3781
Canda, E. R. (1997). Spirituality. In R. L. Edwards (Ed.), Encyclopedia of social
work(19th ed., pp. 299-309). Washington, DC: NASW Press.
Canda, E. R., & Furman, L. D. (1999). Spiritual diversity in social work practice.
NewYork: The Free Press.
Canonizado, I. (2024). When to Use Total Population Sampling in a Research
Study. HubPages.
https://discover.hubpages.com/education/When-to-use-total-population-sa
mpling-in-a-research-study
Caraga State University. (2023). CSU hails as 5th top-performing school in the
Philippines; 1st in Visayas and Mindanao in recent Board Examination for
Psychometricians.
https://www.carsu.edu.ph/?q=news/csu-hails-5th-top-performing-school-p
hilippines-1st-visayas-and-mindanao-recent-board
Caraga State University. (2024). August 2024 board Licensure Exam for
Psychometricians and Psychologists (BLEPP).
https://www.carsu.edu.ph/?q=content/august-2024-board-licensure-exam-
psychometricians-and-psychologists-blepp
Carol Dweck: A Summary of Growth and Fixed Mindsets. (2024). FS Blog.
https://fs.blog/carol-dweck-mindset/
Carroll, M. M. (1997). Spirituality and clinical social work: Implications of past and
current perspectives. Arete,22(1), 25-34.
Carroll, M. M. (1998). Social work’s conceptualization of spirituality. Social
Thought,18(2), 1-13.
 48

Cascio, T. (1999). Religion and spirituality: Diversity issues for the future. Journal
ofMulticultural Social Work,7(3/4), 129-145
Chen, C., Bian, F., & Zhu, Y. (2023). The relationship between social support and
academic engagement among university students: the chain mediating
effects of life satisfaction and academic motivation. BMC Public Health,
23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-17301-3
Chen, W. (2024b, May 23). Growth mindset vs fixed mindset - The impact on
students and educators. EHL Insights.
https://hospitalityinsights.ehl.edu/growth-mindset-vs-fixed-mindset-classro
om
Co, E. U., & Colina, T. C. (2024). A qualitative study on self-efficacy beliefs,
self-regulation, and persistence of dentistry students. Journal of Advances
in Dental Practice and Research, 2, 44–47.
https://doi.org/10.25259/jadpr_35_2023
Cuseo, Joe. (2015). The Case for a Holistic Approach to Promoting Student
Success. ResearchGate. 10.13140/RG.2.1.3953.0962.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American
Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Self-determination theory. In P. A. M. Van
Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of
social psychology (pp. 416–436). Sage Publications Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n21
Dokor, D. (2024b, November 6). How to compute GWA grades in College,
Philippines in 2024. GWA Calculator.
https://gwacalculator.ph/how-to-compute-gwa-grades-in-college/
Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in
predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science,
16(12), 939-944.
Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY:
Ballantine Books.
 49

Elliott E. S., Dweck C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and

achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(1), 5–12.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.1.5
Ephraim, N. (2024, July 1). Time Management: Impact on academic
performance. Adiutor Resources.
https://adiutor.co/blog/time-management-impact-on-academic-performanc
e/
Farrington, C. A., Roderick, M., Allensworth, E., Nagaoka, J., & Keyes, T. (2012).
Teaching Adolescents to Become Learners: The Role of Noncognitive
Factors in Academic Performance. University of Chicago Consortium on
School Research.
Farruggia, S. P., Han, C., Watson, L., Moss, T. P., & Bottoms, B. L. (2018).
Noncognitive Factors and College Student Success. Journal of College
Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025116666539
Fonteyne, L., Duyck, W., & Fruyt, F. (2017). Program-specific prediction of
academic achievement on the basis of cognitive and non-cognitive
factors. Learning and Individual Differences, 56, 34-48.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.05.003
Gallup, G. J., & Castelli, J. (1989). The people’s religion: American faith in the
90’s.New York: Macmillan.
Gallup, G. J., & Lindsay, D. M. (1999). Surveying the religious landscape.
Harrisburg,PA: Morehouse Publishing.
Granada, C. O., & Luzano, R. A. (2023). Family support and academic
performance of learners. International Journal of Research Publications,
127(1). https://doi.org/10.47119/ijrp1001271620235042
Guay, F. (2021). Applying Self-Determination Theory to Education: regulations
types, psychological needs, and autonomy supporting Behaviors.
Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 37(1), 75–92.
https://doi.org/10.1177/08295735211055355
 50

Gnanaprakash, C. (2013). Spirituality and resilience among post-graduate

university students. Journal of Health Management, 15(3), 383-396.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0972063413492046
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S.
(2021). An introduction to structural equation modeling. In Classroom
companion: business (pp.1–29).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7_1
Heydari, N., Janghorban, R., & Akbarzadeh, M. (2020). The relationship between
religious attitudes and academic motivation of nursing and midwifery
students: A descriptive-analytical study. Shiraz E Medical Journal, 21(10),
1–4. https://doi.org/10.5812/semj.95005
Hodge, D. R. (2001). Spiritual genograms: A generational approach to assessing
spiri-tuality. Families in Society,82(1), 35-48
Hodge, D. R. (2003). The Intrinsic Spirituality Scale: A New Six-Item Instrument
for Assessing the Salience of Spirituality as a Motivational Construct.
Journal of Social Service Research, 30(1), 41–61.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J079v30n01_03
Idris, N. H. (2024). Peer-to-Peer Support in Mathematics Education: Its
Effectiveness for college Students in Mindanao State University-Sulu.
https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=23916
Imron, I. (2016). Kinerja guru dilihat dari spiritualitas, komitmen organisasi,
modal psikologis, dan perilaku kewargaorganisasian. BELAJEA:
Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 1(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.29240/bjpi.v1i2.106
JASP Team (2024). JASP. https://jasp-stats.org/
Jiang, Y., Liu, H., Yao, Y., Li, Q., & Li, Y. (2023). The Positive Effects of Growth
Mindset on Students’ Intention toward Self-Regulated Learning during the
COVID-19 Pandemic: A PLS-SEM Approach. Sustainability, 15(3), 2180.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032180
Johnson, C., Gitay, R., Abdel-Salam, A. G., BenSaid, A., Ismail, R., Al-Tameemi,
R. a. N., Romanowski, M. H., Fakih, B. M. K. A., & Hazaa, K. A. (2022b).
Student support in higher education: campus service utilization, impact,
 51

and challenges. Heliyon, 8(12), e12559.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12559
Kamya, H. A. (1997). African immigrants in the United States: The challenge for
research and practice. Social Work,42(2), 154-165
Karlen, Y., Hirt, C. N., Liska, A., & Stebner, F. (2021). Mindsets and
Self-Concepts About Self-Regulated Learning: Their Relationships With
Emotions, Strategy Knowledge, and Academic Achievement. Frontiers in
Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.661142
Kaynak, Ü., Kaynak, S., & Koçak, S. S. (n.d.). The Pathway from Perceived Peer
Support to Achievement via School Motivation in Girls and Boys: A
Moderated-Mediation Analysis. RMLE Online, 46(3), 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2023.2171655
Kenia, D., & Uyun, M. (2023). Islamic religiosity and perceived behavioral control
on academic cheating. International Journal of Islamic Educational
Psychology, 4(1), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.18196/ijiep.v4i1.17743
Manning
Koenig, H. G., McCullough, M. E., & Larson, D. B. (2001). Handbook of religion
and health. New York: Oxford University Press
Krauss, S., Orth, U., & Robins, R. W. (2019). Family environment and
self-esteem development: A longitudinal study from age 10 to 16. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 119(2), 457–478.
https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000263
Lei, H., & Cui, Y. (2018, March). (PDF) Relationships between student
engagement and academic achievement: A meta-analysis.
ResearchGate.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324183400_Rela
tionships_between_student_engagement_and_academic_achievement_A
_meta-analysis
Legault, L. (2017). Self-Determination Theory. In: Zeigler-Hill, V., Shackelford, T.
(eds) Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Springer,
Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099- 8_1162-1
 52

Li, J., Hu, Z., & Pan, L. (2022). Analysis of school support: Systematic literature
review of core Chinese- and English-language journals published in
2000–2021. Frontiers in Psychology, 13.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.933695
Limeri, L. B., Carter, N. T., Choe, J., Harper, H. G., Martin, H. R., Benton, A., &
Dolan, E. L. (2020). Growing a growth mindset: characterizing how and
why undergraduate students’ mindsets change. International Journal of
STEM Education, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00227-2
Liu, Y., Afari, E. & Khine, M.S. Effect of non-cognitive factors on academic
achievement among students in Suzhou: evidence from OECD SSES
data. Eur J Psychol Educ 38, 1643–1657 (2022).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-022-00660-7
Lolandes, Y. G., Zapata, N. A., Flores, J. E. A., & Fernández, Y. O. (2020). Time
management and academic stress in Lima University students.
International Journal of Higher Education, 9(9).
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1281218.pdf
Magpily, M. & Mercado, J. (2015). Non-Cognitive Factors Affecting the Academic
Performance of Fourth Year College Students of a Private College in
Manila. Athens Journal of Education, 2(3), 233-244.
doi=10.30958/aje.2-3-4
Mammadov, S. & Schroeder, K. (2023). A meta-analytic review of the
relationships between autonomy support and positive learning outcomes.
ScienceDirect. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2023.102235
Mariano, L. A., Madel, N. S., & Miranda, A. T. (2022). The Relationship between
Time Management Skills and Academic Performance of Working
Students in Open High School Program. Asian Journal of Education and
Social Studies, 61–66. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2022/v36i2776
Maslang, K. (2023, October). Predictors of Academic Performance Among
Pre-Service Teachers: The Case of a Private Higher Educational
Institution in Northern Philippines. ResearchGate.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374334570_Title_Predictors_of_
 53

Academic_Performance_Among_Pre-service_Teachers_The_Case_of_a
_Private_Higher_Educational_Institution_in_Northern_Philippines_PREDI
CTORS_OF_ACADEMIC_PERFORMANCE_AMONG_PRE-SERVICE_T
E
Miller, W. R. (1998). Researching the spiritual dimensions of alcohol and other
drug problems. Addiction,93(7), 979-990.
Molnár, G., & Kocsis, Á. (2023). Cognitive and non-cognitive predictors of
academic success in higher education: a large-scale longitudinal study.
Studies in Higher Education, 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2271513
Molnár, G., & Kocsis, Á. (2023). Cognitive and non-cognitive predictors of
academic success in higher education: a large-scale longitudinal study.
Studies in Higher Education, 49(9), 1610–1624.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2271513
Mrazek, A., Ihm, E., Molden, D., Mrazek, M., Zedelius, C., & Schooler, J. (2018).
Expanding minds: growth mindsets of self-regulation and the influences
on effort and perseverance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
79, 164–180.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S002210311730544
9
MSEd, K. C. (2024c, November 12). How social support contributes to
psychological health. Verywell Mind.
https://www.verywellmind.com/social-support-for-psychological-health-411
9970
Nayak, S. G. (2019). Impact of Procrastination and Time-Management on
academic Stress among undergraduate nursing Students: a cross
sectional study.
https://internationaljournalofcaringsciences.org/docs/18_nayak_original_1
2_3.pdf
Niazi, Y., Javaid, F., & Gul, M. (2022). Parental Bonding as a Predictor of
Self-Regulation, Proactive Attitude and Academic Performance in
 54

University Students, Journal of Education & Social Sciences, 10 (1),

53-65.
OECD (2019), PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do,
PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en.
OECD (2019), PISA 2018 Results (Volume II): Where All Students Can Succeed,
PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b5fd1b8f-en.
OECD (2019), PISA 2018 Results (Volume III): What School Life Means for
Students’ Lives, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris,
https://doi.org/10.1787/acd78851-en.
Oduwaye, O., Kiraz, A., & Sorakın, Y. (2024). A review of the literature on the
Influence of Peer Support Programs on Student Mental Health and
Well-Being. Cyprus Turkish Journal of Psychiatry & Psychology, 6(2).
Okorobie, D. (2024, June 20). Why is Time Management Important for the
Academic Success of Students? BetterYou.
https://www.betteryou.ai/why-is-time-management-important-for-the-acad
emic-success-of-students/
Pachina, E. (2020). Parents: First Teachers in a Child's Life. International TEFL
and TESOL Training. https://bit.ly/42rA2sO
Pargament, K. I. (1999). The psychology of religion and spirituality? Yes and no.
TheInternational Journal for the Psychology of Religion,9(1), 3-16.
Pellebon, D. A., & Anderson, S. C. (1999). Understanding the life issues of
spiritu-ally-based clients. Families in Society,80(3), 229-238.
Qargha, G. (2023). Research on improving teaching and learning often lacks a
holistic focus—a new collaborative research project hopes to change this.
Brookings.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/research-on-improving-teaching-and-le
arning-often-lacks-a-holistic-focus-a-new-collaborative-research-project-h
opes-to-change-this/
Rahman, B. (2019). Role of Family in Moral Development. Daily sun.
https://bit.ly/3VF0P2w
 55

Rahmawati, S. W. (2014). Role of religiousness/spirituality in resilience of

fisheries college cadets. Journal of educational, health and
community psychology, 3(1), 31-40.
https://dx.doi.org/10.12928/jehcp.v3i1.3732
Richards, P. S., & Bergin, A. E. (1997). A spiritual strategy. Washington, DC:
Ameri-can Psychological Association
Rojas, J. C., Grimaldo, M., Torres, E. M., Medina, E. M., & Contreras, E. L. R.
(2024). Growth mindset, grit, and academic self-efficacy as determinants
of academic performance in Peruvian university students. International
Journal Educational Psychology, 13(2).
Saeed, K. M., Ahmed, A. S., Rahman, Z. M., & Sleman, N. A. (2023). How social
support predicts academic achievement among secondary students with
special needs: the mediating role of self-esteem. Middle East Current
Psychiatry, 30(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43045-023-00316-2
Saleh, Z. & Kowalczyk, D. (2023). Ex Post Facto Designs | Meaning,
Methodology & Examples. Psychology Courses.
https://study.com/academy/lesson/ex-post-facto-designs-definition-exampl
es.html
Savenkov, A. (2021). Cognitive and non-cognitive determinants of academic and
life success. SHS Web of Conferences 117.
https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/pdf/2021/28/shsconf_pg
c2021_01001.pdf
Saputra, Y. N. (2020). Hubungan spiritualitas terhadap motivasi belajar
mahasiswa. Kurios, 6(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.30995/kur.v6i1.127
Schleicher, A. & OECD. (2023). PISA 2022: Insights and Interpretations.
https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA%202022%20Insights%20and%20Interpre
tations.pdf
Shao, Y., Kang, S., Lu, Q., Zhang, C., & Li, R. (2024b). How peer relationships
affect academic achievement among junior high school students: The
chain mediating roles of learning motivation and learning engagement.
BMC Psychology, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01780-z
 56

Sharma, C., & Bhatia, A. (2023). The influence of effective time management on
students’ academic accomplishments. International Journal of
Multidisciplinary Comprehensive Research, 2(6).
https://www.multispecialityjournal.com/uploads/archives/20231121200327
_E-23-07.1.pdf
Shi, Y., & Qu, S. (2021). Cognition and Academic Performance: Mediating role of
personality characteristics and psychology health. Frontiers in
Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.774548
Simplilearn. (2023, August 2). 10 Time management Skills and Techniques for
students. Simplilearn.com.
https://www.simplilearn.com/tutorials/time-management-tutorial/best-time-
management-tips-for-students
Statistics Solutions. (2024, April 17). A comprehensive guide to Structural
equation modeling.
https://www.statisticssolutions.com/free-resources/directory-of-statistical-a
nalyses/structural-equation-modeling/
Stone, B. (2021). The ethical use of fit indices in structural equation modeling:
Recommendations for Psychologists. Frontiers in Psychology, 12.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.783226
Sultanova, G., Shilibekova, A., Rakhymbayeva, Z., Rakhimbekova, A., & Shora,
N. (2024). Exploring the influence of non-cognitive skills on academic
achievement in STEM education: the case of Kazakhstan. Frontiers in
Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1339625
The Times Higher Education. (2024). Asia University Rankings 2024. The Times
Higher Education.
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2024/reg
ional-ranking#!/length/25/locations/PHL/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/s
cores
Tome, J. C., Lorgonio, K. J. V., Lorgonio, R. D., Rosales, A. D. C., Sinajonon, R.
A., & De Juan, J. C. S. (2022). The impact of time management on the
academic performance ofSelected 4th Year Bachelor of Secondary
 57

Education students at Bestlink College of the Philippines.

https://ojs.aaresearchindex.com/index.php/aasgbcpjmra/article/view/1347
4
Tracey, T. J., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1985). The relationship of noncognitive variables
to academic success: A longitudinal comparison by race. Journal of
College Student Development, 26, 405–410.
Tracey, T. J., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1987). Prediction of college graduation using
noncognitive variables by race. Measurement and Evaluation in
Counseling and Development, 19, 177–184.
Utami, L. H. (2020). Bersyukur dan resiliensi akademik mahasiswa. Nathiqiyyah,
3(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.46781/nathiqiyyah.v3i1.69
Van Niekerk, M., & Breed, G. (2018). The role of parents in the development of
faith from birth to 7 years of age. HTS: Theological Studies, 74(2),1-11
Volwerk, O., & Tindal, G. (2011). Documenting Student Performance: an
alternative to the traditional calculation of grade point averages.
Wanzer, D., Postlewaite, E., & Zargarpour, N. (2019). Relationships Among
Noncognitive Factors and Academic Performance: Testing the University
of Chicago Consortium on School Research Model. AERA Open, 5(4).
https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419897275
Wiredufred. (2024, July 14). Peer support in Education: Fostering collaboration
and success. NOTES FOR SENIOR HIGH STUDENTS.
https://www.notesforshs.com/2024/07/peer-support-in-education-fostering
.html#google_vignette
Worley, J. T., Meter, D. J., Hall, A. R., Nishina, A., & Medina, M. A. (2023).
Prospective associations between peer support, academic competence,
and anxiety in college students. Social Psychology of Education, 26(4),
1017–1035. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-023-09781-3
Yeasmin, Salma. "EFFECTIVENESS OF GROWTH MINDSET INTERVENTION
ON ELEMENTARY STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE: A
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW." (2021). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/
educ_teelp_etds/366
 58

Zhao, W., Shi, X., Jin, M., Li, Y., Liang, C., Ji, Y., Cao, J., Oubibi, M., Li, X., &
Tian, Y. (2024b). The impact of a growth mindset on high school students’
learning subjective well-being: the serial mediation role of achievement
motivation and grit. Frontiers in Psychology, 15.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1399343
Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley, G. K. (1988). The
Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 52(1), 30–41.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2
Zimmerman, B. (2015). Self-Regulated Learning: Theories, Measures, and
Outcomes. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral
Sciences (2), 541-546.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.26060-1
Zinnbauer, B. J., Pargament, K. I., Cole, B., Rye, M. S., Butter, E. M., Belavich, T.
G.,Hipp, K. M., Scott, A. B., & Kadar, J. L. (1997). Religion and
spirituality:Unfuzzying the fuzzy. Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion,36(4), 549-564
 59

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Research Instruments

Dweck Mindset Instrument (DMI)

Instructions: Please read each statement carefully and then indicate the
extent to which you agree or disagree, and then mark X in the corresponding
space provided.

(1) (3) (4) (6)

(2) (5)
Statements Strongly Mostly Mostly Strongly
Disagree Agree
Disgree Disagree Agree Agree
1. You have a
certain amount of
intelligence, and you
can’t really do much
to change it
2. Your intelligence
is something about
you that you can’t
change very much
3. No matter who
you are, you can
significantly change
your intelligence
level
4. To be honest, you
can’t really change
how intelligent you
are
5. You can always
substantially change
how intelligent you
are
6. You can learn new
things, but you can’t
really change your
basic intelligence
7. No matter how
much intelligence
you have, you can
always change it
quite a bit
 60

8. You can change

even your basic
intelligence level
considerably
9. You have a
certain amount of
talent, and you can’t
really do much to
change it
10. Your talent in an
area is something
about you that you
can’t change very
much
11. No matter who
you are, you can
significantly change
your level of talent
12. To be honest,
you can’t really
change how much
talent you have
13. You can always
substantially change
how much talent you
have
14. You can learn
new things, but you
can’t really change
your basic level of
talent
15. No matter how
much talent you
have, you can
always change it
quite a bit
16. You can change
even your basic
level of talent
considerably
 61

Brief Self-Control Scale (BSCS)

Instructions: Please indicate how much each of the following statements

reflects about yourself. Then indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree
by marking X in the corresponding space.

(1) (5)
(2) (3) (4)
Not at Very
Statements Unlike Sometimes Like
all like much
me like me me
me like me
1. I have a hard time breaking
bad habits.
2. I am lazy.
3. I say inappropriate things.
4. I do certain things that are bad
for me, if they are fun.
5. I refuse things that are bad for
me.
6. I wish I had more
self-discipline.
7. I am good at resisting
temptation.
8. People would say that I have
iron self-discipline.
9. Pleasure and fun sometimes
keep me from getting work done.
10. I have trouble concentrating.
11. I am able to work effectively
toward long-term goals.
12. Sometimes I can't stop
myself from doing something,
even if I know it is wrong.
13. I often act without thinking
through all the alternatives.
 62

Short Form of Revised Study Process Questionnaire (SF-R-SPQ-2F)

Instructions: This questionnaire contains some questions about your

studies and the way you normally study. There is no right way to study. It
depends on what suits your style and what subjects you study. Therefore, it is
important that you answer each question as honestly as possible.
Please, fill in the appropriate tick in the box provided alongside the item
statement. The letters alongside each item statement stand for the following
response.

A - this item is never or only rarely true of me

B - this item is sometimes true of me
C - this item is true of me about half the time
D - this item is frequently true of me
E - this item is always or almost always true of me
Statements A B C D E
1. I feel that virtually any topic
can be highly interesting once I
get into it.
2. I find most new topics
interesting and often spend extra
time trying to obtain more
information about them.
3. I test myself on important
topics until I understand them
completely.
4. I work hard at my studies
because I find the material
interesting.
5. I generally restrict my study to
what is specifically set as I think
it is unnecessary to do anything
extra.
6. I find it is not helpful to study
topics in depth. It confuses and
waste time when all you need is
a passing acquaintance with
topics.
7. I believe that the lecturers
shouldn’t expect students to
spend significant amounts of
 63

time studying material everyone

knows won’t be examined.
8. I see no point in learning
material which is not likely to be
in the examination.
 64

Structure Of Student Time Management Scale (STMS)

Instructions: Please read each statement carefully and then indicate the
extent to which you agree or disagree, and then mark X in the corresponding
space provided.

(1) (3) (4) (6)

(2) (5)
Statements Strongly Seldom Seldom Strongly
Disagree Agree
Disagree Disagree Agree Agree
1. I postponed the
tasks.
2. I give up easily,
when I can’t
succeed in
completing my
tasks
3. I use a diary for
planning my
activities.
4. I modify my
short-term goals
according to the
demands.
5. I keep my bag
ready for the next
day.
6. I set priorities
for my daily tasks.
7. I write reminder
notes every day.
8. I keep a record
of completed
tasks.
9. I make a list of
things to be done
every day.
10. I plan for
tasks a week in
advance.
11. I have long -
term goals in my
mind.
12. My plans get
cancelled at
times.
 65

13. I get stuck in

daily time
scheduling.
14. I consider
time to have high
value in life.
15. I review my
daily activities
16. I find it difficult
to keep my
schedule.
17. I take on too
many tasks at the
same time.
18. I have set
short-term goals
for my future.
19. I feel I spend
too much time on
entertainment.
20. I am punctual
to school.
21. I have
difficulty in
completing my
tasks.
22. I am bored
with my daily
activities.
23. I think
scheduling the
task is a waste of
time.
24. I allot time for
my hobbies.
25. I submit my
homework,
assignments etc.
well in advance.
26. I feel
unimportant tasks
consume my
time.
27. I have control
over my daily
routine works.
28. I adopt short
cut ways to finish
the tasks.
 66

Multidimensional Social Support Scale (MSPSS)

Instructions: We are interested in how you feel about the following

statements. Read each statement carefully. Indicate how you feel about each
statement.

Circle the “1” if you Very Strongly Disagree

Circle the “2” if you Strongly Disagree
Circle the “3” if you Mildly Disagree
Circle the “4” if you are Neutral
Circle the “5” if you Mildly Agree
Circle the “6” if you Strongly Agree
Circle the “7” if you Very Strongly Agree

Statements

1. There is a special
person who is
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
around when I am in
need.
2. There is a special
person with whom I
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
can share my joys
and sorrows.
3. My family really
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
tries to help me.
4. I get the emotional
help and support I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
need from my family.
5. I have a special
person who is a real
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
source of comfort to
me.
6. My friends really
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
try to help me.
7. I can count on my
friends when things 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
go wrong.
8. I can talk about
my problems with 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
my family.
 67

9. I have friends with

whom I can share
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
my joys and
sorrows.
10. There is a
special person in my
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
life who cares about
my feelings.
11. My family is
willing to help me 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
make decisions.
12. I can talk about
my problems with 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
my friends.
 68

Intrinsic Spirituality Scale (ISS)

Instructions: For the following six questions, spirituality is defined as one’s

relationship to God, or whatever you perceive to be Ultimate Transcendence.The
questions use a sentence completion format to measure various attributes
associated with spirituality. An incomplete sentence fragment is provided,
followed directly below by two phrases that are linked to a scale ranging from 0 to
10. The phrases, which complete the sen-tence fragment, anchor each end of the
scale. The 0 to 10 range provides you with a continuum on which to reply, with 0
corresponding to absence or zero amount of the attribute, while10 corresponds to
the maximum amount of the attribute. In other words, the end points represent
extreme values, while five corresponds to a medium, or moderate, amount of the
attrib-ute. Please circle the number along the continuum that best reflects your
initial feeling

1. In terms of the questions I have about life, my spirituality answers

absolutely
no
all my
questions
questions
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2. Growing spiritually is

more
important
of no
than
importance
anything
to me
else in my
life
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

3. When I am faced with an important decision, my spirituality

play is always the

absolutely overriding
no role consideration
 69

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

4. Spirituality is

the master
motive of
mylife,
not part of
directing
my life
every other
aspect of my
life
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5. When I think of the things that help me to grow and mature as a person, my
spirituality

is absolutely
has no the most
effect on my important
personal factor in my
growth personal
growth
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6. My spiritual beliefs affect

absolutely
no aspect of
every aspect
my life
of my life
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 70

Appendix B. Granted Permission for Research Instrument-Use

Short Form of Revised Study Intrinsic Spirituality Scale (ISS)

Process Questionnaire Author Permission
(SF-R-SPQ-2F) Author Permission