1874-3501/22 Send Orders for Reprints to reprints@benthamscience.

net

The Open Psychology Journal

Content list available at: https://openpsychologyjournal.com

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Impact of Motivation, Learning Strategy, and Intelligence Quotient on Medical

Students' Grades
Ami Febriza1,*, Andi Weri Sompa2, Asty Amaliah3, Andi Tenri Padad4 and Ary I. Savitri5
1
Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Muhammadiyah Makassar, Makassar, Indonesia
2
Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Muhammadiyah Makassar, Makassar, Indonesia
3
Department of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of Hasanuddin, Makassar, Indonesia
4
Department of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of Muhammadiyah Makassar, Makassar, Indonesia
5
Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Utrecht, Netherlands

Abstract:
Background:
Medical students were faced with a problem-based learning (PBL) curriculum that required them to think critically. PBL requires a student to have
the ability to think logically and collect integrated information, which is reflected in their IQ scores. Learning and motivation strategies were
factors that could contribute to their academic achievement. High intelligence does not ensure academic achievement, and students need to
recognize the learning strategies that work best for them. This study aimed to investigate the association of medical students' motivation for
learning and their intelligence quotient with their course grades in their first semester.

Methods:
This study was an observational study of first-semester undergraduate medical students with 134 respondents. Intelligenz Struktur Test (IST) was
used to assess IQ and the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) form was used to measure students' academic motivation and
their use of different learning strategies. Course grades were collected from their biomedical system course in the first semester. Linear regression
analysis was used to determine the association between IQ scores and average biomedical grades.

Results and Discussion:

Linear regression analysis showed that IQ might play a role in determining biomedical system course grades both in the crude and adjusted
analysis (p-value <0.001). None of the investigated motivation and learning scales modified the association between IQ scores and average
biomedical grades.

Conclusion:
Intelligence can predict students' academic performance in their first semester courses. Motivation for learning did not differ between different IQ
groups and did not modify the association between intelligence and academic achievement.

Keywords: Intelligence quotient, MSLQ, Medical student, Academic achievement, Motivation, Linear regression analysis.

Article History Received: July 18, 2021 Revised: December 27, 2021 Accepted: January 20, 2022

1. INTRODUCTION plex ideas, adapt efficiently to the circumstances, learn from

experience, engage in various forms of reasoning, and
Intellectual capacity, as estimated by Intelligence Quotient overcome obstacles by making decisions [1]. Problem-based
(IQ), is one of the determinants of academic performance. IQ learning (PBL), which is a logical step towards developing
indicates an individual's overall capability to comprehend com- students’ abilities to synthesize concepts from a clinical
scenario, is the most common method implemented in medical
* Address correspondence to this author at the Department of Physiology,
schools [2]. This method requires a student to have the ability
Faculty of Medicine, University of Muhammadiyah Makassar, Makassar,
Indonesia, Jl. Sultan Alauddin No. 259, Makassar, South Sulawesi, Indonesia; to think logically and collect integrated information, which is
Tel: (0411) 840199; Fax: (0411) 865588; Mobile: 085256655987 / reflected in their IQ scores. IQ was correlated with problem
087840485864 (WA); E-mail: amifebriza@med.unismuh.ac.id solving and educational performance [3].

DOI: 10.2174/18743501-v15-e2205100, 2022, 15, e187435012205100

2 The Open Psychology Journal, 2022, Volume 15 Febriza et al.

Another factor that can contribute to academic collected from the faculty academic office.
achievement is the learning and motivation strategies. High
intelligence does not ensure academic achievement, and 2.2.1. Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire
students need to recognize learning strategies that work best for (MSLQ)
them [4]. Since there is much information to be learned, as a
Student’s motivation and learning strategies were assessed
medical student, efficient learning strategies are important [5].
using the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire
Students who have high motivation in their academic education
(MSLQ). This questionnaire consists of 81 items. MSLQ
should have an excellent opportunity to have a better academic
questionnaire is a self-reported questionnaire and was
performance. They could obtain higher scores, show more
effort, and be better at planning their performance and time developed for evaluating undergraduate student’s motivation
management [6]. Furthermore, there is a body of evidence and their self-regulated learning towards a particular course
suggesting that motivations affect various aspects of cognitive [12, 13]. The questionnaire was designed on a 7-point Likert
function, from rudimentary cognition [7] to more complex scale format, starting from “very untrue of me” to “very true of
attention [8], learning [9], memory, and control [9]. me.” There are two sections in MSLQ: a motivation section
and a learning strategies section. The motivation section
A previous study provides direct evidence that motivation included 31 items in 6 subscales for assessing students’ goals,
plays a role in students’ success and academic achievement [
values, and beliefs toward a specified course, thoughts about
10 ]. Another study also found that attitude, motivation, and
their ability to achieve a category, and test anxiety. The six
intelligence quotient were predictors of academic achievement
subscales of the motivation section encompass intrinsic goal
in mathematics [11]. Good academic achievement is of high
orientation, extrinsic goal orientation, task value, control of
value to educators, hence the requirement to determine the
learning beliefs, self-efficacy for learning and performance,
major components which contribute to academic performance
and test anxiety. The training strategies section includes 31
among students. This study aimed to investigate the association
of medical students’ motivation for learning and their
items in 9 subscales for assessing students’ use of cognitive-
intelligence quotient with their course grades in their first metacognitive strategies and resource management strategies.
semester. The nine subscales of the learning strategies section assess
rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical thinking,
2. METHODS metacognitive self-regulation, time and study environment
management, effort regulation, help-seeking, and peer learning.
2.1. Subjects Also, the training strategies section includes 19 items
This study was observational on first-semester concerning student management of various resources [13, 14].
undergraduate students from the Faculty of Medicine, Scale is constructed by taking the mean of the items that make
University of Muhammadiyah Makassar, Indonesia. This study up the scale. For example, extrinsic goal orientation has four
was conducted from September 2019 to February 2020. A total items. So, student individual scores for extrinsic goal
of 134 students participated in this study. The criteria for the orientation would be computed by summing the four items and
subjects in this research were students enrolled in Biomedical taking the average [15]. Higher scores on motivation scales and
System I, Biomedical System II, and Biomedical System III learning strategies indicate that students can regulate their
courses. Biomedical system courses consist of human anatomy, cognition, affect, and motivation during their study [16].
histology, biochemistry, and physiology. Average Biomedical This instrument has been tested for reliability in various
Grades were calculated as the mean of Biomedical I, studies. When it was first developed, this instrument's
Biomedical II, and Biomedical III grades. Exclusion criteria
reliability was very strong; it had a Cronbach’s alpha value on
were students with minimum course participation of less than
each subscale ranging from 0.52 to 0.93 and had a moderate
80%.
significant subscale correlation [15]. In another study involving
2.2. Instrumentation 411 students, the reliability of each subscale ranged from 0.745
to 0.788 [17]. Furthermore, in a study with 1,114 respondents,
In this study, two main instruments were used: Intelligenz the correlation between item scores and total scores that had
Struktur Test (IST) to assess students' IQ and the Motivated been corrected ranged from 0.58 to 0.15 (p-value <0.01) on the
Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) form to motivation subscale aspect and 0.68 to 0.19 (p-value <0.01) on
measure students' academic motivation and their use of the sub-scale part learning strategy scale [18].
different learning strategies. IST forms were filled out during
the admission process at the beginning of the semester, while 2.2.2. Intelligent Quotient (IQ) Test
the students filled out the MSLQ forms throughout the
semester. Data about parents' income were collected by the We measured the level of intelligence in this study using
academic office of the faculty using a self-reported the IST. The IST consists of 176 questions, which are divided
questionnaire. These questionnaires were filled out during the into nine subtests. The scoring process in the IST is to give a
admission process when students were first admitted into the score of 1 for the correct answer and a score of 0 for the wrong
university. Data about students' body weight, height, blood answer on each sub-test. The scores obtained are grouped into
pressure, and heart rate were collected by the faculty clinic three categories based on the tertiles; high IQ group (IQ score
during the admission process. All other information, such as > 96), average IQ group (IQ score 90 – 96), and low IQ group
students’ demographic characteristics and course grades, was (IQ score <90).
Motivation, Learning Strategy, and Intelligence Quotient The Open Psychology Journal, 2022, Volume 15 3

2.3. Data Analysis different between different IQ groups (Table 3).

First, baseline data will be tabulated by students’ IQ level The result of linear regression analysis showed that IQ
groups. Normally distributed data (such as Biomedical System might play a role in determining Biomedical course grades
I, II, and III course grades, blood pressure, heart rate, body both in the crude and adjusted analysis. A one point increase in
mass index [BMI], body height, and body weight) were IQ score was associated with a 0.48 (95% CI 0.20 – 0.75, p
presented as the mean and standard deviation. Categorical data, <0.001) higher mean Biomedical course grades after
such as gender and parents’ income, were presented in numbers adjustment for gender, parents’ income, BMI, and blood
and percentages. Chi-square test was used to test the difference pressure (Table 4).
in the proportion of gender and parents’ income between In the subgroup analysis, none of the investigated
different IQ groups. One-way ANOVA test was used to motivation and learning scales modified the association
determine whether there were any statistical differences in between IQ scores and average biomedical grades (Table 5).
Biomedical System courses grades, blood pressure, heart rate,
BMI, and body height and weight between different IQ groups. 4. DISCUSSION
Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to test if there were differences
The present study showed that higher IQ scores were
in motivation and learning strategies scales between different
independently associated with higher average biomedical
IQ groups. All statistical tests were considered as significant if
grades during the first semester. Motivation and learning
the p-value <0.05. Linear regression analysis was used to
scales/subscales did not modify the association. This study has
determine the association between IQ scores and average
limitations because it did not assess other factors contributing
biomedical system grades. Finally, a subgroup analysis was
to the relationship, such as parental guidance, learning support
done to investigate if certain motivation and learning
facilities, health, socio-economic status, emotional intelligence,
scales/subscales modify the association between IQ scores and
and spiritual intelligence. Nevertheless, it was the first study to
average biomedical system grades. The data obtained was
investigate motivation and learning strategies among IQ groups
processed using SPSS 23 (IBM Corporation, New York, USA)
in medical students in relation to their academic achievement
for Macbook.
in the first semester.
3. RESULTS Based on the results on gender characteristics, it was found
that both genders have no difference in the IQ category (Table
The study included 134 students. Respondents were
1). Several studies have also shown the equivalence of IQ
classified into three groups: high IQ group (n=42), average IQ
scores between males and females [19, 20]. These findings are
group (n=47), and low IQ group <90 (n=45). Participants in
also consistent with the metanalysis of the general population
different IQ groups were not different in terms of gender,
that showed no sex difference in IQ [21]. Although
parents’ income, blood pressure, heart rate, BMI, body height,
anatomically, the male brain is 8-10% larger and the female
and body weight. Data on the characteristics of the respondents
brain has a thick corpus callosum, some researchers concluded
can be seen in Table 1.
that these structural differences would lead to comparable
Biomedical System I course grades were higher in the high intellectual performance overall. IQ scores have a positive
IQ group rather than in other groups, although not statistically relationship with the density of gray matter in the cerebral
significant. Meanwhile, for Biomedical System II and III, the cortex, limbic system, and cerebellum. Physiologically, these
average IQ group had higher grades than the other two groups regions play an essential role in verbal function: executive
(p-value < 0.05) (Table 2). On the other hand, motivation and function, error detection, and memory (especially working
learning strategies scales and sub-scales were not statistically memory) [22].

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of respondent’s characteristics.

Variables Total (n = 134) High IQ score (n = 42) Average IQ score Low IQ score P-value
(n = 47) (n = 45)
Gender 25 (18.7%) 10 (22.2%) 7 (14.9%) 8 (19.0%) 0.66**
• Male 109 (81.3%) 35 (77.8%) 40 (85.1%) 34 (81.0%)
• Female
Parents’ income/month 70 (52.2%) 21 (46.7%) 29 (61.7%) 20 (47.6%) 0.27**
• Low income 64 (47.8%) 24 (53.3%) 18 (38.3%) 22 (52.4%)
• High income
Blood Pressure (mmHg) 107.9±8.3 108.1±8.3 106.3±7.6 109.3±8.8 0.23*
• Systolic 73.9±6.3 72.8±5.5 73.6±6.0 75.3±7.2 0.17*
• Diastolic
Heart Rate 79.1±4.7 79.0±5.0 79.6±4.8 78.3±4.2 0.26*
Body Mass Index 21.1±4.2 21.1±4.3 20.8±3.5 21.3±4.8 0.83*
Height (Kg) 157.5±7.1 157.9±7.1 156.7±7.2 158.0±7.0 0.60*
Weight (m) 52.4±11.4 52.8±12.0 51.2±10.0 53.2±12.3 0.69*
*Data expressed as mean ± SD and p-value with One-Way ANOVA test
** Data expressed as frequency (percentages) and p-value with Chi-square test
4 The Open Psychology Journal, 2022, Volume 15 Febriza et al.

Table 2. Biomedical course grades between IQ Groups.

Variables Total High IQ score (n = 42) Average IQ score Low IQ score P value
(n = 134) (n = 47) (n = 45)
Course Grades
• Biomedical I 62.2±19.6 66.9±17.0 63.5±22.5 56.5±17.6 0.04*
• Biomedical II 66.6±17.55 70.2±16.6 72.8±11.2 56.7±19.5 <0.01*
• Biomedical III 58.8±18.7 62.8±17.4 65.6±10.4 48.0±21.9 <0.01*
*Data expressed as mean ± SD and p-value with One-Way ANOVA test.

Table 3. Descriptive Statistics of motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ).

Scales Sub-scales High IQ score (n = 42) Average IQ score Low IQ score P-value
(n = 47) (n = 45)
Motivation Scales Intrinsic goal orientation 6.05±0.82 5.73±0.85 5.85±0.82 0.93
Extrinsic goal orientation 6.42±1.04 6.13±1.03 6.40±0.64 0.64
Task value 6.34±0.94 6.16±0.84 6.35±0.49 0.21
Control of learning beliefs 6.06±0.88 6.01±0.82 6.11±0.78 0.74
Self-efficacy for learning and performance 6.14±0.97 5.85±0.94 5.99±0.70 0.90
Test anxiety 3.91±1.24 4.29±1.29 4.12±1.12 0.33
Learning Rehearsal 6.00±0.62 5.66±0.93 5.67±1.16 0.33
Strategies Scales Elaboration 5.80±0.85 5.52±1.13 5.59±1.26 0.67
Organization 5.72±0.95 5.29±1.27 5.46±1.28 0.38
Critical thinking 5.71±0.73 5.40±0.90 5.50±1.21 0.24
Metacognitive self-regulation 5.47±0.61 5.29±0.86 5.38±1.06 0.65
Time and study environment 5.26±0.52 5.04±0.70 4.95±1.03 0.22
Effort regulation 4.79±1.02 4.94±0.85 4.77±1.01 0.86
Help seeking 5.21±0.59 5.26±0.93 5.11±1.09 0.84
Peer learning 5.88±0.82 5.68±0.91 5.85±1.08 0.30
*Data expressed as mean ± SD and p-value with Kruskal-Wallis H Test

Table 4. Association between students’ IQ scores and their average Biomedical grades in first semester.

Average Biomedical Grades

Coefficients (95% CI) P-value
IQ Scores Crude 0.44 (-5.07 – 46.25) <0.001
Adjusted* 0.48 (0.20 – 0.75) <0.001
*Regression models adjusted for gender, parents’ income, BMI and blood pressure

Table 5. Subgroup analysis on the association between motivation and learning scales scores and Average Biomedical grades
across different IQ groups.

Sub-scales Average Biomedical Grades

High IQ score Average IQ score Low IQ score
Coefficients 95% CI P-value Coefficients 95% CI P-value Coefficients 95% CI P-value
Intrinsic goal orientation -7.29 -22.56; 7.96 0.33 -1.87 -9.47; 5.71 0.61 2.28 -6.05; 10.61 0.58
Extrinsic goal orientation -1.86 -14.49; 10.76 0.76 -4.84 -12.78; 3.10 0.22 -2.83 -14.84; 9.17 0.63
Task value 7.99 -9.49; 25.48 0.35 -1.35 -10.22; 7.51 0.75 -1.44 -17.39; 14.49 0.85
Control of learning beliefs 3.69 -5.76; 13.16 0.42 -2.20 -10.79; 6.39 0.60 5.52 -2.85; 13.90 0.18
Self-efficacy for learning -5.59 -23.56; 12.38 0.52 8.24 -3.00; 19.49 0.14 7.49 -5.48; 20.46 0.24
and performance
Test anxiety -1.20 -7.97; 5.56 0.71 2.95 -0.48; 6.38 0.09 5.02 -0.16; 10.21 0.05
Rehearsal -13.18 -28.72; 2.34 0.09 7.49 -0.89; 15.89 0.07 11.10 -1.19; 23.40 0.07
Elaboration 4.58 -12.16; 21.33 0.57 0.19 -12.53; 12.92 0.97 -11.37 -31.52; 8.76 0.25
Organization 7.29 -3.23; 17.82 0.16 5.03 -3.91; 13.99 0.26 12.22 -3.21; 27.65 0.11
Critical thinking 0.21 -13.78; 14.22 0.97 -3.32 -15.64; 8.98 0.58 -2.23 -15.59; 11.12 0.73
Motivation, Learning Strategy, and Intelligence Quotient The Open Psychology Journal, 2022, Volume 15 5

(Table 5) contd.....
Metacognitive self- -14.98 -34.88; 4.92 0.13 -6.94 -16.96; 3.07 0.16 0.70 -18.97; 20.38 0.94
regulation
Time and study 4.82 -11.55; 21.20 0.55 -4.49 -12.25; 3.26 0.24 5.68 -4.10; 15.46 0.24
environment
Effort regulation -0.09 -10.46; 10.27 0.98 -2.64 -9.26; 3.97 0.42 -1.71 -9.94; 6.50 0.67
Help seeking 8.70 -8.43; 25.85 0.30 -1.71 -8.35; 4.93 0.60 -12.59 -25.37; 0.19 0.05
Peer learning 0.64 -6.57; 7.86 0.85 5.65 -1.35; 12.66 0.11 2.30 -8.81; 13.43 0.67

This study reported no difference in IQ levels between disintegrate with IQ results. However, conditions that are
low- and high-income families (Table 1). These results called “nonintellective” traits, such as competitiveness and a
contradict those reported by previous studies that low tendency to try harder, in people with low intelligence, can be a
economic status has an impact on IQ and academic strong motivation that will increase their IQ results [34].
performance. Students who come from families with low
We found that IQ can be a predictor of academic
economic status generally experience conditions of poor
achievement (Table 4), but there are many other factors as
nutritional fulfilment and low parental education and, in the
well. Learning motivation factors, parental guidance, learning
end, have low cognitive abilities [23, 24]. Nutritional status
support facilities, health, socio-economic status, emotional
described by BMI did not make a difference to IQ levels (Table
intelligence, and spiritual intelligence also participate in
1). BMI was computed as weight in kilograms divided by the
determining success in achieving academic achievement.
square of height in meters. The relationship between BMI and
Although the subgroup analysis results of the components of
IQ is complicated, and it cannot be explained by one factor
motivation and learning scales did not provide meaningful
alone. Several studies reported a significant correlation
results, there were exciting findings on the regression
between BMI and IQ in children after adjusting for type of
coefficient values. Rehearsal is a scale measuring how often
delivery, kind of baby food or complementary feeding,
students use study strategies such as rereading notes, course
residence location, family income, and parental education [25,
readings, and memorizing lists of keywords and concepts. A
26].
high score means students use these strategies reasonably
Significant results were obtained from the correlation often. According to our findings, a one-point increase in the
between IQ level and biomedical scores of students (Table 2). rehearsal subscale may be associated with lower biomedical
IQ has traditionally been thought of as a predictor of grades in the high IQ group (β -Coefficients -13.18), while in
educational performance. The relationship between IQ scores the other two groups, the grades were higher grades with a
and academic achievement is due to differences in receiving positive β -Coefficients. Even though this regression is not
lessons [27]. Students with a higher IQ score are more likely to statistically significant, probably because of the limited number
achieve lessons taught in classes than other students who have of subjects in the study, it still can be concluded that there is a
lower IQ scores. IQ also has a vital function in decision making tendency for people with low intelligence to try harder, which
that has an important role when the subject answers exam can increase their motivation scale in trying to achieve better
questions [27, 28]. Individuals with higher IQ scores were able grades [34]. Another interesting result was found in help
to respond more appropriately to a question. Research shows seeking subscale. This is a scale that identifies students’ ability
that IQ value plays a role in determining the subjects' accuracy to seek some assistance, such as peer help or individual teacher
in responding to a questionnaire [29]. Another study shows that assistance that facilitate student achievement [15]. The effect
intelligence is the best predictor of GPA, where it is found that of help seeking was associated with higher biomedical grades
the value of intelligence has a moderate to strong correlation in the high IQ group, while in the low IQ group, the effect was
with GPA [30]. Students with a high IQ will have good negative. In another study, self-efficacy, selfregulation of
abilities in analyzing, imagining, and making judgments learning, and academic achievements are positively correlated
logically and accurately, thus indirectly improving their [35]. Different from the result of the previous study, our results
achievement [31]. showed no difference in self-efficacy for learning and
In addition to intelligence, student success in learning is performance among IQ groups.
also influenced by psychological factors. Learning motivation
was thought of as the most important psychological aspect that CONCLUSION
provides direction for learning activities carried out by students Intelligence can predict students’ academic performance in
so that the desired goals can be achieved. Another study their first semester courses. Motivation for learning did not
concluded that motivation can act as a factor that impacts differ between different IQ groups and did not modify the
intelligence [32]. Students who have a high motivation would association between intelligence and academic achievement.
demonstrate more effort, better information organization, better
Future implications from this study can bring benefits to
time management, and show better performance [6]. Our
educators/lecturers. For example, knowing students' cognitive
findings, however, showed that there are no differences in
strategies in learning and identifying motivational factors and
motivation scale between different IQ groups (Table 3). The
goals for their academic performance can help
same result was reported in another study, which showed that
educators/lecturers better understand the factors that will affect
motivation was not related to intelligence [33]. In another
student performance.
study, motivation does not come from a steady and adaptive
individual. At this point, the relation of the motivation test will Therefore, educators/lecturers should recognize their
6 The Open Psychology Journal, 2022, Volume 15 Febriza et al.

students' motivations, internal or external motivations, and map assessment rubric in a cohort of medical students. BMC Med
Educ 2009; 9(1): 19.
overall learning strategies and encourage them to learn to [http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-9-19] [PMID: 19400964]
achieve better academic performances. [6] Mukhtar F, Muis K, Elizov M. Relations between psychological needs
satisfaction, motivation, and self-regulated learning strategies in
ETHICS APPROVAL AND CONSENT TO PARTI- medical residents: A cross-sectional study. MedEdPublish 2018; 7: 87.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.15694/mep.2018.0000087.1]
CIPATE [7] Posner MI, Snyder CR, Solso R. Attention and cognitive control Cogn
Psychol Key readings 2004; 205.
This study was approved by the Health Medical Research
[8] Rothkirch M, Schmack K, Deserno L, Darmohray D, Sterzer P.
Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine and Health Attentional modulation of reward processing in the human brain. Hum
Science, University of Muhammadiyah Makassar (Makassar, Brain Mapp 2014; 35(7): 3036-51.
Indonesia), with registration number 056/UM.PKE/IX/40/2019 [http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22383] [PMID: 24307490]
[9] Daw ND, Shohamy D. The cognitive neuroscience of motivation and
on October 31, 2019. learning. Soc Cogn 2008; 26(5): 593-620.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/soco.2008.26.5.593]
HUMAN AND ANIMAL RIGHTS [10] Ilo E, Onyejesi C. Relationship between intelligence quotient,
academic motivation and academic performance in secondary school
No animals were used at any stage of this research. All students. J Sci Res Rep 2021; 27(1): 71-9.
research procedures involving humans were performed in [http://dx.doi.org/10.9734/jsrr/2021/v27i730413]
[11] Moenikia M, Zahed-Babelan A. A study of simple and multiple
accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible
relations between mathematics attitude, academic motivation and
institutional and/or national research committee on human intelligence quotient with mathematics achievement. Procedia Soc
experimentation and with the 1975 Helsinki Declaration and its Behav Sci 2010; 2(2): 1537-42.
later amendments or comparable ethical standards. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.231]
[12] Duncan TG, McKeachie WJ. The making of the motivated strategies
for learning questionnaire. Educ Psychol 2005; 40(2): 117-28.
CONSENT FOR PUBLICATION [http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4002_6]
[13] Garcia T, Pintrich PR. Assessing students’ motivation and learning
The participants participated voluntarily and have given strategies in the classroom context: The motivated strategies for
their individual consent to participate on an informed consent learning questionnaire bt - alternatives in assessment of achievements,
form. learning processes and prior knowledge. Dordrecht: Springer
Netherlands 1996; pp. 319-39.
[14] Sungur SC, Tekkaya C. Effects of problem-based learning and
STANDARDS OF REPORTING traditional instruction on self-regulated learning. J Educ Res 2006;
99(5): 307-20.
STROBE guidelines have been followed. [http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.5.307-320]
[15] Pintrich PRR, Smith D, Garcia T, McKeachie W. A manual for the use
AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND MATERIALS of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann
Arbor Michigan 2016. 48109, 1259-1991, doi: ED338122
Data supporting the finding of the article are available in [16] Pintrich PR. A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and
the Zenodo Repository at zenodo.org, with reference number self-regulated learning in college students. Educ Psychol Rev 2004;
16(4): 385-407.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5720946 .
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0006-x]
[17] Arend BD. Course assessment practices and student learning strategies
FUNDING in online courses. Online Learn 2019; 11(4): 3-17.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v11i4.1712]
None. [18] Cebesoy UB. Pre-service science teachers’ perceptions of self-
regulated learning in physics. Turkish J Educ 2013; 2(2): 4-15.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST [19] Benbow CP, Lubinski D, Shea DL, Eftekhari-Sanjani H. Sex
differences in mathematical reasoning ability at age 13: Their status 20
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. years later. Psychol Sci 2000; 11(6): 474-80.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00291] [PMID: 11202492]
[20] Leahey E, Guo G. Gender differences in mathematical trajectories. Soc
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Forces 2001; 80(2): 713-32.
The authors would like to thank the students of the Faculty [http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/sof.2001.0102]
[21] Rushton JP, Jensen AR. Race and IQ: A theory-based review of the
of Medicine, the University of Muhammadiyah Makassar, for research in richard nisbett intelligence and how to get it. Open Psychol
their consent to participate in this research. J 2010; 3(1): 9-35.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874350101003010009]
REFERENCES [22] Frangou S, Chitins X, Williams SCR. Mapping IQ and gray matter
density in healthy young people. Neuroimage 2004; 23(3): 800-5.
[1] Baron IS, Leonberger KA. Assessment of intelligence in the preschool [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.05.027] [PMID:
period. Neuropsychol Rev 2012; 22(4): 334-44. 15528081]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11065-012-9215-0] [PMID: 23054100] [23] Akubuilo UC, Iloh KK, Onu JU, Ayuk AC, Ubesie AC, Ikefuna AN.
[2] Chang BJ. Problem-based learning in medical school: A student’s Academic performance and intelligence quotient of primary school
perspective. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 2016; 12: 88-9. children in Enugu. Pan Afr Med J 2020; 36: 129.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.11.011] [PMID: 27942381] [http://dx.doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2020.36.129.22901] [PMID:
[3] Jalili A, Hejazi M, Fomani GE, Morovvati Z. The correlation between 32849984]
IQ with educational performance and problem solving mediation. J [24] Adedeji I, John C, Okolo S, Ebonyi A, Abdu H, Bashir M.
Heal Promot Manag 2018; 7(1): 1-8. Malnutrition and the intelligence quotient of primary school pupils in
[http://dx.doi.org/10.21859/jhpm-08011] jos, Nigeria. Br J Med Med Res 2017; 21(2): 1-13.
[4] Fong CJ, Davis CW, Kim Y, Kim YW, Marriott L, Kim S. [http://dx.doi.org/10.9734/BJMMR/2017/32504]
Psychosocial factors and community college student success: A meta- [25] Tabriz AA, Sohrabi MR, Parsay S, et al. Relation of intelligence
analytic investigation. Rev Educ Res 2016; 87(2): 388-424. quotient and body mass index in preschool children: A community-
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654316653479] based cross-sectional study. Nutr Diabetes 2015; 5(8): e176-6.
[5] D’Antoni AV, Zipp GP, Olson VG. Interrater reliability of the mind [http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nutd.2015.27] [PMID: 26258767]
Motivation, Learning Strategy, and Intelligence Quotient The Open Psychology Journal, 2022, Volume 15 7

[26] Datar A, Sturm R, Magnabosco JL. Childhood overweight and [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.08.001]

academic performance: National study of kindergartners and first- [31] Naylor FD. Personality and Educational Achievement. J. Wiley &
graders. Obes Res 2004; 12(1): 58-68. Sons Australasia Pty 1972.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/oby.2004.9] [PMID: 14742843] [32] Duckworth AL, Quinn PD, Lynam DR, Loeber R, Stouthamer-Loeber
[27] Neisser U, Boodoo G, Bouchard TJ, et al. Intelligence: Knowns and M. Role of test motivation in intelligence testing. Proc Natl Acad Sci
unknowns. Am Psychol 1996; 51(2): 77-101. USA 2011; 108(19): 7716-20.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1018601108] [PMID: 21518867]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.77]
[33] Gagné F, St Père F. When IQ is controlled, does motivation still
[28] Heaven PCL, Ciarrochi J. When IQ is not everything: Intelligence,
predict achievement? Intelligence 2001; 30(1): 71-100.
personality and academic performance at school. Pers Individ Dif
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2896(01)00068-X]
2012; 53(4): 518-22. [34] Wechsler D. Non-intellective factors in general intelligence. J Abnorm
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.04.024] Soc Psychol 1943; 38(1): 101-3.
[29] Widhiarso W. Relationship between cognitive ability and accurany of [http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0060613]
individual responses in questionnaires. Indonesia 2012; (1): 1-7. [35] Agustiani H, Cahyad S, Musa M. Self-efficacy and self-regulated
[30] Laidra K, Pullmann H, Allik J. Personality and intelligence as learning as predictors of students academic performance. Open
predictors of academic achievement: A cross-sectional study from Psychol J 2016; 9(1): 1-6.
elementary to secondary school. Pers Individ Dif 2007; 42(3): 441-51. [http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874350101609010001]

© 2022 Febriza et al.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0), a copy of which is
available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original author and source are credited.