Edited by: Silke Hertel, Heidelberg University, Germany
Reviewed by: Jun Wei, Tsinghua University, China; Katherine Pears, Oregon Social Learning Center, United States
This article was submitted to Educational Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Is the way that kindergarteners view their willpower – as a limited or as a non-limited resource – related to their motivation and behavioral self-regulation? This study is the first to examine the structure of beliefs about willpower in relation to behavioral self-regulation by interviewing 147 kindergarteners (52% girls) aged 5 to 7 years (
Childhood behavioral self-regulation is the capacity to focus and maintain attention on tasks and follow instructions to consciously regulate the self in line with goals, including the capacity to inhibit unwanted thoughts, feelings, or impulses; it is a key predictor for successful learning and adjustment to school and life (
In summary, four main questions guided the present study: (1) Can willpower theories be reliably assessed in kindergarteners? (2) Are kindergarteners’ willpower theories related to their behavioral self-regulation? (3) Is this association stronger in children with low academic ability levels? and (4) Is the relation between willpower theories and behavioral self-regulation mediated by children’s learning goal orientation?
There is a consensus that self-regulation is a key predictor of success in school and life, and childhood years are seen as a sensitive period for development of self-regulation (
Impaired behavioral self-regulation has been described as being accountable for many educational and societal issues, ranging from learning difficulties, job underperformance, behavioral problems at school, and violence to obesity (
Over the last decades, Dweck and colleagues (
Previous studies with adults have shown that people who believe that willpower is non-limited (vs. limited) showed better self-regulation in everyday life, such as procrastinating less and following a healthier diet (
As studies with experimentally induced as well as measured willpower theories in adults show that a non-limited willpower theory is associated with various aspects of self-regulation, we expect a relation with behavioral self-regulation in children. Especially in Swiss kindergartens, which offer children the possibility to choose tasks, task level, and task engagement during free play, demands of self-regulation are high (
According to
Taken together, we assume that willpower is not just a skill but is already rooted in a mental model about the nature of willpower that might encourage children to seek (or discourage them from seeking) effective strategies to meet high self-regulatory demands that can help them execute high behavioral self-regulation (
Educational research on diverse motivational beliefs has demonstrated that a growth mindset (
Research on adults’ implicit theories about willpower, however, suggests that when demands are high, a non-limited willpower theory promotes self-regulation directly, by keeping self-efficacy high (
We propose that non-limited willpower theories additionally affect self-regulation indirectly through the children’s higher willingness to exert effort in order to learn and increase their competencies by embracing challenging tasks. This orientation toward mastery motivates children to approach opportunities to train behavioral self-regulation and is based on the conviction that learning requires time and effort. It has been termed “learning goal orientation” or “mastery approach goal orientation” (
In the present study, we suggest that children with a non-limited willpower theory might be more prone to adopt a high learning goal orientation due to their enhanced willingness to invest effort. In turn, they should be more likely to choose more difficult tasks, which train their behavioral self-regulation. In contrast, children with a limited theory might choose easy tasks that they already master to not deplete their resources. For example, a kindergarten child with a learning goal orientation might choose to play a new difficult game with numbers over replaying a familiar game, even though it requires attention and persistence and success is not guaranteed. In contrast, a performance orientation is associated with engaging in easy tasks that one can master quickly with minimal effort (
This study extends past literature on willpower theories in adults and takes up questions raised in
The sample included 147 children at 19 kindergartens in urban and rural areas that reflect the demographic composition of the German-speaking part of Switzerland. Only children whose parents had given written informed consent participated. For six children there was no consent to participate because the teacher only provided information to the parents the day before the assessment; parents of five children did not consent for personal reasons (religion, parents in divorce); and two children did not give a reason. We received parents and children’s informed consent to participate for 91% of the children attending the kindergartens. The children were in their second year of kindergarten and had an age range of 65–86 months (
Due to the short attention span in children of this age, the children were visited twice in their kindergartens with an interval of 2 to 4 weeks between the assessments. The questionnaires were each administered in the context of a larger battery of cognitive tasks in a session that lasted approximately 30 min. Given the kindergarten children’s lack of reading and writing skills, tests were administered through an individual interview procedure. Willpower theories and goal orientation were assessed at both visits with Versions A and B of the questionnaires (see
Behavioral self-regulation, the ability to focus and maintain attention on a task and inhibit inappropriate actions, was measured with the Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders (HTKS) task (
To assess limited and non-limited willpower theories in kindergarteners, we developed a self-report method with age-appropriate items based on the measure used by
Children’s learning goal orientation, their willingness to exert effort to learn something (
Gender, age, and academic ability level were assessed with an online questionnaire administered to the teachers. As no formal grades are given in kindergarten, we asked teachers to assess students’ academic abilities in mathematics and language. To increase the comparability and validity of the teachers’ global performance assessments, the teachers were given three examples each to integrate in their assessment of the mathematics domain (knowing numbers, calculate, count) and language domain (knowing letters, reading words, writing words). Teachers had to rate each child in their class on a 9-point semantic differential scale displayed by stick figures in a horizontal row. Lower values indicated a lower level of academic ability. The achievement measure used in this study therefore reflects a social reference standard, similar to grades (
Analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 25.0. Based on
Descriptives.
Range | SR | WT | GO | AAL | Gender | Age | ||||
Behavioral self-regulation (SR) | 142 | 12–57 | 41.70 | 10.36 | – | 0.227** | 0.223** | 0.352** | –0.101 | 0.132 |
Willpower theories (WT) | 138 | 1–5 | 2.89 | 1.05 | 0.219** | – | 0.264** | 0.246** | 0.109 | 0.104 |
Learning goal orientation (GO) | 138 | 1–5 | 3.66 | 1.18 | 0.227** | 0.285** | – | 0.288** | 0.224** | 0.136 |
Academic ability level (AAL) | 142 | 1–9 | 6.21 | 2.04 | 0.363** | 0.226** | 0.269** | – | –0.010 | 0.165 |
Gender | 147 | 1–2 | 1.48 | 0.50 | –0.113 | 0.116 | 0.186* | –0.010 | – | 0.129 |
Age in months | 143 | 65–86 | 77.21 | 4.67 | 0.118 | 0.176* | 0.131 | 0.154 | 0.147 | – |
As we developed new items tailored to this age group to assess willpower theories, it is recommended that exploratory factor analysis (EFA) should precede CFA (
Our second research question addressed the relation between willpower theories and behavioral self-regulation. Because empirical studies reported inconclusive or culturally different results regarding age and gender differences in behavioral self-regulation (
Hierarchical regression model for behavioral self-regulation.
Model | β | CI95 lower | CI95 upper | ||||||
1 | 23.207 | 14.696 | 0.117 | –5.862 | 52.277 | ||||
Age | 0.297 | 0.192 | 0.134 | 0.124 | –0.082 | 0.677 | |||
Gender | –3.045 | 1.807 | –0.146 | 0.094 | –6.619 | 0.528 | |||
0.019 | 0.104 | ||||||||
2 | 23.730 | 14.315 | 0.100 | –4.588 | 52.049 | ||||
Age | 0.208 | 0.190 | 0.094 | 0.275 | –0.167 | 0.583 | |||
Gender | –3.509 | 1.767 | –0.168 | 0.049 | –7.005 | –0.013 | |||
Willpower theories | 2.429 | 0.851 | 0.243 | 0.005 | 0.754 | 4.114 | |||
0.069 | 0.006 | ||||||||
3 | 20.977 | 13.614 | 0.126 | –5.956 | 47.910 | ||||
Age | 0.133 | 0.181 | 0.060 | 0.463 | –0.225 | 0.491 | |||
Gender | –3.301 | 1.679 | –0.158 | 0.051 | –6.623 | 0.021 | |||
Willpower theories | 1.756 | 0.827 | 0.175 | 0.036 | 0.120 | 3.392 | |||
Academic ability level | 1.641 | 0.420 | 0.319 | 0.000 | 0.809 | 2.472 | |||
0.161 | 0.000 |
Although the results showed that willpower theories are related to behavioral self-regulation, we hypothesized that the relation would be moderated by academic ability levels.
Model coefficients of the moderation of academic ability level on the relation between willpower theories and behavioral self-regulation, controlling for age, and gender.
Coeff. | CI95 lower | CI95 upper | |||||
Intercept | –1.237 | 15.472 | –0.080 | 0.936 | –31.848 | 29.375 | |
Willpower theories (WT) | 8.275 | 2.469 | 3.351 | 0.001 | 3.390 | 13.160 | |
Academic ability level (AAL) | 4.573 | 1.127 | 4.058 | 0.000 | 2.343 | 6.802 | |
WT × AAL | –1.012 | 0.362 | –2.793 | 0.006 | –1.728 | –0.295 | |
Gender | –3.424 | 1.638 | –2.091 | 0.038 | –6.664 | –0.184 | |
Age | 0.185 | 0.177 | 1.042 | 0.299 | –0.166 | 0.536 |
Graphical depiction of the moderation of the effect of willpower theories on behavioral self-regulation by academic ability level using
The simple mediation analysis (Model 4 in PROCESS) conducted using ordinary least square path analysis showed that willpower theories directly and indirectly influenced behavioral self-regulation through its effect on learning goal orientation (
Statistical diagram of the mediation model with standardized regression coefficients for presumed influence of willpower theories on behavioral self-regulation through goal orientation with statistical controls; ∗
Model coefficients and completely standardized regression coefficients for the conditional direct and indirect effects of willpower theories on behavioral self-regulation, through goal orientation.
Goal orientation |
Behavioral SR |
|||||||||
β | Coeff. | β | Coeff. | |||||||
Willpower theories | 0.250 | 0.280 | 0.094 | 0.004 | 0.192 | 1.889 | 0.859 | 0.029 | ||
Goal orientation | – | – | – | – | 0.217 | 1.909 | 0.767 | 0.014 | ||
Gender | 0.133 | 0.313 | 0.195 | 0.111 | –0.200 | –4.136 | 1.737 | 0.019 | ||
Age | 0.068 | 0.017 | 0.021 | 0.412 | 0.080 | 0.178 | 0.185 | 0.338 | ||
Constant | 1.064 | 1.584 | 0.503 | 21.537 | 13.988 | 0.126 | ||||
This study is the first to demonstrate that kindergarteners already have distinct and varying ideas about the nature of their willpower that can be assessed reliably. Children’s implicit willpower theories range from a non-limited to a limited theory in low and high achievers and are distinguishable from related concepts such as a learning goal orientation. Importantly, this study shows that kindergarteners’ beliefs about the nature of willpower are related to behavioral self-regulation. Children who agreed more that they needed a break after strenuous tasks (limited theory) performed worse in the behavioral self-regulation task than children who rather agreed that exerting willpower is energizing (non-limited theory). Further, our results support the hypothesized moderation by academic ability levels: willpower theories are especially beneficial for children with a low ability level. We also found support for the hypothesized mediation: The more children endorsed a non-limited theory about their willpower the more they expressed a preference for challenging tasks in order to learn, which accounted for their better performance in behavioral self-regulation. These results support our assumption that a limited willpower theory in children is associated with a preference for easy tasks. We assume that Children with a limited theory avoid difficult tasks so as not to strain their willpower and therefore seldom train their behavioral self-regulation.
One of the main questions leading this research was why some children come to effectively regulate their behavior, which is related to better adaption and performance in school, while others struggle. The results highlight the possibility that behavioral self-regulation may not only depend on biological predisposition or develop as a result of repeated training, as examined in past research (
Future research should look at the role willpower theories play in different teaching and learning settings. Especially longitudinal designs are important, with multiple variables to assess developmental patterns after the transition from kindergarten to primary school, where the educational setting often changes dramatically.
Various previous studies have shown that the behavioral self-regulation task used in this study is predictive of achievement later in school and that it measures children’s performance in working memory, attention, and inhibition. This is what children need to successfully regulate themselves in classrooms, where they must actively remember instructions from the teacher, focus on the task at hand, and ignore distractions. Since the relation between a more non-limited willpower theory and behavioral self-regulation was especially pronounced in children with low academic ability levels, willpower theories may represent a resilience factor against poor performance. In this study, willpower theories did not seem to be related directly to behavioral self-regulation in children with high academic ability levels. We were able to rule out that the measurements for willpower theories and behavioral self-regulation were not sensitive enough in the upper ranges. But it might be that a non-limited theory has positive effects for children with high academic abilities in other areas of self-regulation, such as in the use of different or more effective learning strategies (
In the present study we tested two distinct models (moderation by ability level and mediation through goal orientation) concerning the relation between willpower theories and self-regulation. An open question is, whether these two models can be combined within one more comprehensive model. It could be that academic ability level also influences the indirect effect between willpower theories and behavioral self-regulation, as ability level might moderate the relationship between willpower theories and goal orientation. Previous research suggests that learning goal orientations are independent from ability level (
A second possibility could be that ability level moderates the relationship between goal orientation and behavioral self-regulation. Previous research documents that interventions promoting a growth mindset, which is supposed to promote learning goal orientation, are specifically beneficial among lower achieving students (
Our results highlight that willpower theories already vary widely in kindergarteners, and
Therefore, teachers and parents may play a crucial role in the forming of willpower theories. Further, it is plausible that teachers’ approaches to instruction may lead to differences in the associations between willpower theories and self-regulation in students. Interventions should look deeper into the assumed causal relation between self-regulation and willpower theories as well as possible mechanisms that affect kindergarteners’ implicit theories. Classroom practices such as low autonomy during goal striving (
Although this study expands previous findings, there are some limitations that should be addressed. First, the correlational nature of this study precludes any claims of causation. As previous studies with students (
Second, further research should validate the newly developed instrument to assess willpower in children. The items that we developed for this study may not be feasible for other age groups (e.g., younger children might have only early forms of mindsets) and cultures, as research points out that there are differences in willpower theories across cultures (
Third, we assessed academic ability levels by teacher ratings of students’ academic abilities, which has advantages and disadvantages. With no formal grades given in kindergarten, teachers’ assessment of students’ abilities are valid judgments, and the kindergarten group as social reference norm is an important indicator (
Further, although the assessment of learning goal orientation as children’s willingness to exert effort to learn something vs. choosing easy tasks that they already master on a unidimensional scale is acceptable for this age group (
In sum, this study suggests that willpower theories in young children can be reliably assessed, which opens up exciting new avenues for theory and application of self-regulation research. The present research shows that kindergarteners who think that willpower is limited already self-regulate less well than their peers with a non-limited view, and they prefer to do easy tasks that they already master. This holds especially true for children with lower academic achievement levels. Early behavioral deficiencies are known to be problematic for school transitioning and future learning behavior (
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Ethics Commitee, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Zurich, Switzerland. Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants’ legal guardian/next of kin.
MC conceived and designed the study, developed the new measure, collected and analyzed the data, and wrote a first version of the manuscript. VS verified the analyses. VS and VJ provided advise and discussed the results. All authors wrote the final manuscript.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: