Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Learning and Individual Differences 18 (2008) 492 – 496

www.elsevier.com/locate/lindif

The role of personality and motivation in predicting early college academic

success in non-traditional students at a Hispanic-serving institution
James C. Kaufman a,⁎, Mark D. Agars a , Muriel C. Lopez-Wagner b
a
Learning Research Institute, California State University, San Bernardino, CA, United States
b
California State University, San Bernardino, CA, United States
Received 19 May 2006; received in revised form 20 November 2007; accepted 22 November 2007

Abstract

Non-cognitive factors represent a chance to learn more about how to help students succeed in early college experiences. This study examined
personality and motivation as predictors of first-quarter GPA in a sample of 315 non-traditional undergraduates at a Hispanic-serving institution.
Our results provide support for the importance of high levels of conscientiousness, intrinsic motivation, and low levels of extrinsic motivation in
first-quarter school success. Implications and possible interventions are discussed.
© 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Non-cognitive; School achievement; College; Hispanic; Motivation; Personality

Almost 15 years ago, Mouw and Khanna (1993) noted that
there was considerable variance in college GPA that could not
be explained by the traditional pre-college predictors (e.g., high
school GPA, SAT and ACT scores). Since then, Robbins et al.
(2004) identified three types of predictors: traditional (e.g., SAT
scores), demographic (e.g., gender), and psychosocial factors
(e.g., personality, motivation). Robbins, Allen, Casillas, Peter-
son, and Le (2006) found that several psychosocial factors were
related to academic performance and retention.
The important factors, which they dub “Student Readiness”
indicators, included Academic Discipline, Social Activity,
Emotional Control, Commitment to College, and Social Con-
nection. Indeed, one can argue, as did Robbins et al. (2004), that
such a descriptive approach is a valuable one. Such approaches
integrate more traditional concepts, such as the five-factor per-
sonality model or the intrinsic–extrinsic theory of motivation,
allowing past research to be utilized.
Indeed, there have been many studies of personality and
academic success, mostly using the Big-Five model that argues
five basic factors underlie traditional personality assessment. The
personality factor most repeatedly linked to academic achieve-
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jkaufman@csusb.edu (J.C. Kaufman).
1041-6080/$ - see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2007.11.004
ment is conscientiousness (e.g., Higgins, Peterson, & Rihl, 2007;
Noftle & Robins, 2007). Other studies have occasionally found
evidence to support a different factor (for example, Lounsbury,
Welsh, & Gibson, 2005, found evidence for openness to expe-
rience), but nothing close to the strong pattern arguing for the
importance of conscientiousness.
The relationship between motivation and school success is
also well established (e.g., Pintrich & Schunk, 1996), if less
clearly. Several studies have looked at academic success and
motivational orientation. Intrinsic motivation and its related
goals have been found to relate to classroom success (e.g.,
Church, Elliott, & Gable, 2001). The research is not as consistent
as it is with personality; for example, Baker (2004) found that
motivation was not related to academic achievement.
Studies that have examined both personality and motivation
have found highly conflicting results (e.g., McKenzie, Gow, &
Schweiter, 2004; Phillips, Abraham, & Bond, 2003). In this
paper, we study personality and motivation variables on a unique
population of non-traditional students at a Hispanic-serving
institution to determine if past results are replicated. Most of the
previously discussed studies have been conducted on traditional
populations. Yet non-traditional students can often have dif-
ferent needs, demands on their time, and reliance on different
types of cognitive abilities (e.g., Chao & Good, 2004). Self-
 J.C. Kaufman et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 18 (2008) 492–496
beliefs in Hispanic populations have been studied (e.g., Gloria,
Castellanos, & Lopez, 2005); in contrast, variables such as per-
sonality and motivation have not been studied in depth. Given
the extensive studies showing the importance of personality and
motivation, this oversight should be rectified. Based on past
results, we anticipate that, in replication of past work, con-
scientiousness and intrinsic motivation will be related to aca-
demic achievement in a population of non-traditional students at
a Hispanic-serving institution.
Experiences during the early stages of college have been
found to be critical to student adjustment and, ultimately, to
long-term academic success (Harackiewicz, Barron, Tauer, &
Elliot, 2002). In fact, researchers have suggested that even the
first two weeks of school can have long-term impact on college
student experiences (Woosley, 2003). This study will examine
the relationship of personality and motivation on first-quarter
academic success.
1. Method
1.1. Educational institution
The host University is mid-sized (approximately 14,000
students), and serves a student body that comprises a substantial
portion of non-traditional students. Specifically, the mean age of the
student body is 25.9 years. The student population is ethnically
diverse (32.75% Hispanic, 11.74, African American, 4% Asian-
Pacific Islander), and the University is recognized by the US
Federal Department of Education as a Hispanic-serving institution.
Further, the University draws from a population that is substantially
economically disadvantaged, evidenced in part by the fact that the
most recent data (2005–2006) reveals 57% of the student
population received the need-based Pell grant. In addition, more
than 50% of the student population is first-generation college
student, and nearly 40% of the student population has dependents.
1.2. Participants
Participants (n = 315) were undergraduate students complet-
ing their first quarter of study at a four-year university in the
southwestern United States. The sample was predominantly
women (245; 79%) and represented a mix of racial/ethnic back-
grounds including European American/Caucasian (46%), His-
panic American/Latino (27%), African American/Black (10%),
and Asian American (9%), with the remaining 8% indicating
“other.” The mean age of participants (M = 23.53, SD = 8.55) was
slightly lower than the overall University population (25.9), but
is consistent with the mean age (23.33) of undergraduates. This
difference was expected given the sample comprises new
students. The mean GPA in the present sample (M = 3.11, SD =
.66) was slightly higher than the GPA for the overall University
population (3.01).
1.3. Procedure
Participants were recruited through in-class announce-
ments, flyers, and an invitation sent via email during the
493
initial weeks of the Fall quarter of 2003. Each form of
communication included a description of the study and
information on how to participate. In order to assure
confidentiality, each interested student was assigned a
unique password which served as their access code to the
on-line survey. The survey included one hundred ninety-
three Likert-type items, and a single page of demographics.
One hundred ten items were used in the present study. The
remaining items measured similar individual academic
characteristics, but were not germane to the current research.
Participation required approximately 45 min, and each
participant was entered into a drawing for $5.00 gift
certificates. Academic information, coded by participant
password, was obtained from the University's institutional
research office and combined with survey data. Personality,
motivation, and demographic data were collected from
participants during the first several weeks of the Fall quarter.
Subsequent academic performance data (i.e., participants'
Fall Quarter GPA) were gathered at the beginning of the
Winter quarter (i.e., roughly three months after survey data
were gathered).
1.4. Measures
1.4.1. Motivation orientation
The Kaufman–Agars Motivation-orientation Scale
(KAMS: Kaufman & Agars, in press) was used to measure
participant motivation. The KAMS comprises nine scenarios
(such as choosing a college class) and 60 items. Participants
respond using a 10-point Likert-type scale to indicate the
extent to which each statement represents his or her likely
behavior or preference. The scale includes intrinsic and
extrinsic factors, with 30 items representing each. The
intrinsic factor represents individual preferences for activ-
ities that are worthwhile, provide opportunity for growth,
and suggest that intelligence is malleable. The extrinsic
factor represents individual preferences for tasks that
achievement, rewards and recognition, and the belief that
intelligence is fixed. In the present study, coefficient alphas
were .91 (intrinsic) and .93 (extrinsic).
1.4.2. Personality
The five-factor model of personality was measured using the
50-item version of the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP;
Goldberg, 1999; International Personality Item Pool, 2001). The
IPIP comprises 10 Likert-type items to measure each of five
personality dimensions including extroversion, agreeableness,
conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness to experi-
ence. Coefficient alphas for each dimension were: extroversion
(α = .87), agreeableness (α = .76), conscientiousness (α = .78),
emotional stability (α = .85), and openness to experience
(α = .76).
1.4.3. Academic success
Academic success was measured using first-quarter
grades. The University's Institutional Research Office
provided academic information which was combined with
494 J.C. Kaufman et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 18 (2008) 492–496

Table 1
Means, standard deviations, and inter-correlations of all study variables
Variable Mean (SD) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. GPA 3.11 (.66) na
2. HSGPA 3.31 (.47) .28 na
3. Mother education 4.51 (1.69) .16 .13 na
4. Father education 4.62 (1.77) .17 .16 .60 na
5. KAMS-I 7.50 (1.21) .08 .07 .06 .05 .91
6. KAMS-E 5.23 (1.27) −.05 .14 .04 −.03 .56 .93
7. Extraversion 3.15 (.80) .03 .10 .02 .05 .17 .10 .87
8. Agreeableness 4.09 (.55) .06 .12 .01 .10 .30 − .05 .30 .76
9. Conscientiousness 3.71 (.61) .18 .26 −.05 .07 .16 .09 .01 .22 .78
10. Emotional stability 3.20 (.78) .07 −.04 .01 .03 .04 − .13 .20 .16 .16 .85
11. Openness 3.66 (.57) .12 .08 .14 .10 .22 − .01 .31 .30 .18 .08 .76
Note: Listwise N = 315. Scale alphas are italicized and presented diagonally where appropriate.

survey data. As a result, success data were represented by for subsequent analyses. Means, standard deviations, and biva-
actual GPA values. riate correlations for all study variables are presented in Table 1.
In order to examine the relationships between personal charac-
1.4.4. Control variables teristics and first-quarter performance, hierarchical multiple
High school GPA and parental education levels were mea- regression in SPSS was used. Variables were entered in two
sured and included as control variables in subsequent analyses. steps and examined for the prediction of first-quarter GPA.
Each participant provided a self-report high school GPA (using As the primary intention of the study was to examine the
a 1.0–4.0 scale). Parental education level was measured using predictive impact of personality and motivation orientation be-
two separate single-item responses to “Mother's Education” and yond that explained by traditional measures of success, we
“Father's Education.” Responses were coded a value from one entered High School GPA and parental education level in Step 1.
to seven, with higher values indicating higher levels of edu- In Step 2, the seven individual difference variables were entered
cation (e.g., “1” = “Grade 5 or below”, “3” = “Some high school simultaneously, including intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
but didn't finish”, and “7” = “Graduate degree”. orientation and measures of the five personality dimensions
(extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional sta-
2. Results bility, and openness to experience). Results of the analyses are
presented in Table 2.
Data screening for missing data, univariate and multivariate The overall model was significant [F(12, 306) = 4.491,
outliers, and violations of normality (Tabachnick & Fidell, p = .001] in the prediction of first-quarter GPA. The first Step,
2001), resulted in the exclusion of 13 cases who were outliers including high school GPA and parental education level,
and were found to have used a non-valid response patterns. accounted for 10% of the variance in the school performance
Once removed, the final data set (n = 315) met the assumptions outcome [F (3,315) = 11.458, p = .001]. The addition of intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation and the big five personality factors in
Step 2 explained an additional 6% of the variance in first-
Table 2 quarter GPA. This change was also significant [Fchange (9,306) =
Regression results for predicting first-quarter GPA 2.054, p = .03]. In the final model, four variables produced
Variable B SE B Β significant coefficients. These were high school GPA (β = .24),
intrinsic motivation orientation (β = .15), extrinsic motivation
Step 1
HSGPA .34 .08 .25 orientation (β = −.16), and conscientiousness (β = .12). Complete
Mother education .03 .03 .07 results of the regression analysis are presented in Table 2.
Father education .04 .03 .11
3. Discussion
Step 2
HSGPA .34 .08 .24
Mother education .03 .03 .08 The results provide support for non-cognitive characteristics
Father education .03 .03 .09 in the prediction of early academic success in a sample drawn
KAMS-I .08 .04 .15 from a largely non-traditional college student population at a
KAMS-E − .08 .04 − .16 Hispanic-serving institution. Specifically, results provide sup-
Extraversion − .02 .05 − .01
port for the personality trait conscientiousness, and for indivi-
Agreeableness − .08 .08 − .06
Conscientiousness .12 .06 .12 dual motivation orientation, considering both intrinsic and
Emotional stability .04 .05 .05 extrinsic orientations independently. Each and all of these var-
Openness .07 .07 .06 iables offered significant prediction of first-quarter academic
Note: N = 315. Step 1 r 2 = .10 (adjusted r 2 = .09); Overall r 2 = .16 (adjusted performance, even taking into account the effects of high school
r 2 = .14). Significant Beta's are in italics ( p b .05). GPA and parental education.
 J.C. Kaufman et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 18 (2008) 492–496
Conscientiousness, intrinsic motivation, and extrinsic
motivation were all significant predictors of first-quarter
academic success. These results are consistent with past
studies, including the finding of Robbins et al. (2006) on the
importance of academic discipline (a key component of
conscientiousness) and commitment to college (a key
component of intrinsic motivation). In addition, our work
adds to the literature on the previously discussed relation-
ship between motivation and college success by providing
support for the importance of intrinsic motivation and for
the possible harm of extrinsic motivation (e.g., Cooper,
Clasen, Silva-Jalonen, & Butler, 1999).
The primary finding from this study is that non-cognitive
constructs proved to be significant predictors of performance
at a Hispanic-serving institution with a population com-
prised substantially of non-traditional students. The general
consistency of the current findings with past research on
traditional populations suggests that key variables that have
previously surfaced may be equally important across
different ethnicities and populations. Indeed, one practical
implication of this study is that diverse college communities
may equally benefit from research findings conducted on
traditional populations. Although the effects of personality
and motivation are not large (i.e., explaining 6% of the
variance in GPA after high school performance and parental
education are accounted for), they represent a meaningful
contribution. Even modest predictors of academic perfor-
mance are rare, and these findings encourage the continued
consideration of factors that may enhance the early academic
experiences of college students.
Building on these and previous results, interventions can be
developed to maximize student success. Such interventions are
currently used with success, typically focusing on academic-
related topics such as study skills (e.g., Sayer, De Saintonge,
Evans, & Wood, 2002). Additional programs could be tailored
to more individual characteristics that are associated with aca-
demic success. Conscientiousness, for example, was shown to
be an important predictor in this and other studies. This factor is
comprised of such traits as being organized and following a
schedule (Kyllonen, Walters, & Kaufman, 2005). One skill that
requires the same traits is time management – which has also
been found to be correlated with higher grades (Britton &
Tesser, 1991). A possible intervention could be to help students
develop time management skills by holding seminars on how to
use the calendar function on Microsoft Outlook or by giving out
free software that helps students plan out their semester. Such
interventions, which would dovetail well with pre-existing in-
terventions, could lead to better time management skills and,
perhaps, encourage conscientious behavior.
It is worth noting, however, that high school GPA explained
less variance in college GPA in our sample than past studies have
shown (e.g., Daugherty & Lane, 1999). One likely reason for this
discrepancy is that first-quarter performance represents only one
small sample of overall college performance, which is more
susceptible to the influence of external factors than cumulative
college GPA after one or more years of education. Another
possibility is that in a sample of non-traditional college students,
495
high school GPA may be a less valid indicator of current abili-
ties. Some students transferred in from community college;
others graduated high school many years ago. The same factors
that limited the relationship between high school and first-quar-
ter college GPA, however, may have also had an effect on per-
sonality and motivation. Consequently, these results may not
generalize to all college populations, and continued considera-
tion of non-traditional populations is warranted. Another caveat
to the study is that survey response itself may be related to
college success. Woosley (2003) found that the simple variable
of whether college first year students responded to a survey
predicted first-quarter success. It is possible that participating
students were already primed for higher levels of success. Fi-
nally, the positive correlation between intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation orientation suggests that the dimensions may not be
as independent as proposed (Kaufman & Agars, in press). Des-
pite this, the regression weights for each are consistent in di-
rection with their respective zero-order correlation to GPA,
which provides support for their meaningful and independent
relationship with college performance.
Our study adds to the growing body of research that identifies
individual-level variables that predict first-quarter academic
success. Specifically, this study demonstrates the importance of
high levels of conscientiousness, intrinsic motivation, and low
levels of extrinsic motivation in a non-traditional population. We
see future work continuing to explore these differences at the
individual level – and moving beyond motivation and per-
sonality to include such variables as thinking styles, emotional
intelligence, self-efficacy, creativity, and other non-cognitive
variables (e.g., Kyllonen et al., 2005).
References
Baker, S. R. (2004). Intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivational orientations: Their
role in university adjustment, stress, well-being, and subsequent academic
performance. Current Psychology, 23, 189−202.
Britton, B. K., & Tesser, A. (1991). Effects of time management practices on
college grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 405−410.
Chao, R., & Good, G. E. (2004). Nontraditional students' perspectives on college
education: A qualitative study. Journal of College Counseling, 7, 5−12.
Church, M. A., Elliot, A. J., & Gable, S. L. (2001). Perceptions of classroom
environment, achievement goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 93, 43−54.
Cooper, B. L., Clasen, P., Silva-Jalonen, D. E., & Butler, M. C. (1999). Creative
performance on an in-basket exercise: Effects of inoculation against extrin-
sic reward. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14, 39−57.
Daugherty, T. K., & Lane, E. J. (1999). A longitudinal study of academic and social
predictors of college attrition. Social Behavior and Personality, 27, 355−362.
Gloria, A. M., Castellanos, J., & Lopez, A. G. (2005). An examination of
academic nonpersistence decisions of Latino undergraduates. Hispanic
Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 27, 202−223.
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory
measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Mervielde,
I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe,
Vol. 7. (pp. 7−28) Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2002).
Predicting success in college: A longitudinal study of achievement goals and
ability measures as predictors of interest and performance from freshman
year through graduation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 562−575.
Higgins, D. M., Peterson, J. B., & Pihl, R. O. (2007). Prefrontal cognitive ability,
intelligence, Big Five personality, and the prediction of advanced academic
496 J.C. Kaufman et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 18 (2008) 492–496

and workplace performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Robbins, S. B., Allen, J., Casillas, A., Peterson, C. H., & Le, H. (2006).
93, 298−319. Unraveling the different effects of motivational and skills, social, and self-
International Personality Item Pool (2001). A Scientific collaboratory for the management measures from traditional predictors of college outcomes.
development of advanced measures of personality traits and other individual Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 598−616.
differences (http://ipip.ori.org/). Internet Web Site. Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A.
Kaufman, J.C., & Agars, M.D. in press. The Kaufman–Agars motivation (2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A
orientation scale. unpublished manuscript. meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 261−288.
Kyllonen, P. C., Walters, A. M., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005). Noncognitive Sayer, M., De Saintonge, M. C., Evans, D., & Wood, D. (2002). Support for
constructs and their assessment in graduate education: A review. Educa- students with academic difficulties. Medical Education, 36, 643−650.
tional Assessment, 10, 153−184. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics, 4th ed.
Lounsbury, J. W., Welsh, D. P., & Gibson, L. W. (2005). Broad and narrow Needham, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
personality traits in relation to cognitive ability in adolescents. Personality Woosley, S. A. (2003). How important are the first few weeks of college? The
and Individual Differences, 38, 1009−1019. long term effects of initial college experiences. College Student Journal, 37,
McKenzie, K., Gow, K., & Schweitzer, R. (2004). Exploring first-year academic 201−207.
achievement through structural equation modeling. Higher Education
Research & Development, 23, 95−112.
Mouw, J. T., & Khanna, R. K. (1993). Prediction of academic success: A review
of the literature and some recommendations. College Student Journal, 27,
328−336.
Noftle, E. E., & Robins, R. W. (2007). Personality predictors of academic
outcomes: Big five correlates of GPA and SAT scores. Journal of Perso-
nality and Social Psychology, 93, 116−130.
Phillips, P., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2003). Personality, cognition, and
university students' examination performance. European Journal of Perso-
nality, 17, 435−448.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.