ArticlePloS one2025
High school science fair: What students say-mastery, performance, and self-determination theory.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Most high school students indicate that participation in science and engineering fairs (SEFs) increased their interest in science and engineering (S&E). The underlying appeal of SEF participation is unknown. However, having this information will help to identify best practices leading to more effective student participation and successful outcomes. To learn more about the appeal of SEF participation, we incorporated into our national SEF surveys a free text Reason Why? question asking students the reasons why SEF participation increased or not their interest in S&E. In this paper, we report and analyze the positive and negative comments by 1191 students who participated in our surveys during 2021-22 and 2022-23 and provided free text reasons. The positive reasons that students mentioned most frequently were learned new things; experience doing research; enjoyed/fun experience; and career choice. The negative reasons most frequently mentioned were participation not fun/stressful/boring; not a good project; not interested in science; and required to participate. Overall, students who received coaching and help from scientists made the most positive comments, consistent with our finding that students who received these kinds of help achieved better SEF outcomes. Students who participated in school-only level SEFs made the most negative comments. Reasons students gave why SEF participation increased their interest in S&E aligned with mastery criteria. By contrast, reasons students gave in a previous study regarding why competitive SEFs should be required aligned with performance criteria. Mastery and performance orientations (learning vs. winning) integrate differently with the three elements of self-determination theory: motivation, competence and community engagement. Recognizing these differences in relation to science fair requirements and the S&E career interests of students who participate in SEFs has the potential to enhance the impact of SEF participation on student STEM interest and knowledge.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.