www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

Introduction

Modern society requires competitive erudite persons, aimed at developing and able to adapt to

changes; this request helps to form such social value as success. That is why the problem of modern

young people being successful becomes extremely topical nowadays. Success conditions systematizing

helps to assume that there is a stable structure of intellectual and personal variables, acting as a so-called

“skeleton”, providing real and potential success. Mental representations of success may be considered

as crystallizing bases of this stable structure. Person’s potential, but rst and foremost actual success in

different spheres of activity depends on mental representations, notions and images formed on success

(Romero-Galisteo et al., 2022; Welsch and Zimmer, 2018). Success actualization in educational and

professional activities becomes one of the most important indices for employers: they prefer hiring those

students who were successful in educational activities and had advanced academic achievements.

(Goegan and Daniels, 2021). That is why the basic variables in this research are the students’ academic

success and its predictors, represented by mental representations.

Academic success has been a relevant problem for many decades (Ishkov, 2019; Lewis and Yates,

2019). Theoretic analysis of modern researches showed that the academic success can be expressed

through a great variety of criteria/indices. These criteria include academic progress (Fréchette-Simard et

al., 2022); average mark, knowledge and skills achieved and overall satisfaction (Goegan and Daniels,

2021); completion of education and positive experience in professional algorithms, practical evaluation

of schemes and models (Roshchevskaya, 2013); being ready to defend own point of view, active and

Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor

Irina A. Kibalchenko

, Tatiana V. Eksakusto

Department of psychology and life safety, Federal State-Owned Educational Autonomy Establishment of Higher Education

«Southern Federal University», Taganrog, Russian Federation, e-mail: kibalirina@sfedu.ru, exakusto@sfedu.ru

Abstract: The analysis is aimed at dening peculiarities of mental representations in homogeneous cluster groups,

represented by the students characterized by different (high, average or low) academic progress levels. Deductive and correlation

design of the research is dened here as a general method. Statistic design: the research is held taking into account a mixed

method, including several qualitative and quantitative techniques of data processing and interpreting; more specically cluster

analysis (used for relatively homogeneous groups dening), multiple regression analysis (used to determine the impact of mental

representations characteristics on academic success) as well as Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. The average value of the regression

model signicance reects the veracity of the research results. The attained statistic results prove that mental representations

have peculiar impact on students’ academic success and there is an effect of the students’ academic activity progress splitting.

On the one hand, the research helps to identify cluster groups of students characterized by success exteriorization indices

growth and academic success indices reduction. On the other hand, non-linear impact of mental representations characteristics

on students’ academic success was identied (the effect of inversion); i.e. some mental representations indices are highly

developed, but the quality of education is low and individual resource is hard to implement in everyday life. Academic progress

index, high level of studying and professional competences acquirement orientation as well as the activity factor are dened as

measures of academic success mental representations splitting in groups. These results and conclusions prove the scientic

fact that mental representations have an inuence on the students’ academic success. This inuence is multidimensional and

vague. These facts offer a challenge of the research in considering highly-effective psychotechnologies for developing mental

representations in general and students’ academic success in particular.

Keywords: predictors, mental representations, academic success, academic progress, implicit theories.

Original scientic paper

Received: December, 21.2022.

Revised: March, 29.2023.

Accepted: April, 01.2023.

UDK:

159.953/.955.072-057.875(470)

159.947.5.072-057.875(470)

10.23947/2334-8496-2023-11-1-51-62

Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Corresponding author: kibalirina@sfedu.ru

www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

positive attitude to studying/working; being adaptive (being ready to confront challenges) (Nadtochyy,

2017); effective record-keeping and time-management (Gaponova and Popova, 2016; Lewis and Yates,

2019); academic stress resistance (Martin et al., 2022); time for answering questions, answer correctness

coefcient and decision-making condence coefcient (Bakanov and Zelenova, 2015), etc.

However, the question of which variables are predictors of academic success is still topical. Analysis

of different researches in this sphere showed that the academic success predictors can be conditionally

subdivided into intellectual/cognitive, personal/non-cognitive and situational (connected with tasks, their

complexity, strategy of studying, etc.). The last group of variables is large enough and is studied in various

pedagogic and psychological researches. It includes the model of education (e.g., the model of ipped

classroom, which helps to reduce stress and to increase academic progress) (Aydin and Demirer, 2022)

and strategies of education (Freiberg-Hoffmann et al., 2022) using modern humanitarian technologies

(dialogic, critical thinking development, projecting, self-presentation) (Sokolova and Khudoteplova, 2017)

and such methods of education as experimental learning (Li and Li, 2021), frequency of students interacting

with teachers as well as an academic validity (as a stimulation and support of students achievements) (Li

and Li, 2021), etc.

The level of an intellectual activity efciency is, in many respects, a dening factor for academic

success. There are many researches proving these stable links. General (i.e. intelligence, creativity)

(Bezerra, Alves and Azoni, 2022) and specic (speed of information processing, memory, thinking,

attention, imagination and speech) cognitive predictors determine academic success at the beginning

of studying as well as at other stages of getting education. These predictors dene abilities to establish

logical connections and to identify what is critically important and what is merely a detail (Larkina, 2021;

Postavnev et al., 2020). For example, in a situation of solving averagely complex school tasks, a high level

of cognitive development and a high need for cognition contribute to internal motivation and involvement

in studying, helps educating process to be successful (Lavrijsen et al., 2021). Critical thinking correlates

with academic self-esteem (average or moderate level of critical thinking is connected with adequately

high academic self-concept) (Dehghani et al., 2011; Mafarja and Zulnaidi, 2022). Intelligence and person

implicit theories acceptance is a determining cognitive factor of academic efciency and success (Dweck,

2015).

Intellectual exibility/humility as well as uid intelligence are one of the most important cognitive

predictors of academic success. Intellectual humility determines the efciency of fullling tasks of different

complexity degrees and efciency of coping with problems in future life (Ratu, Rai and Savitri, 2021).

Flexible intelligence (including non-verbal one) has an impact on creation in case of indirect inuence

of eld independence (acting as cognitive style), which can determine academic success (Bouchefra et

al., 2022; Giancola, Palmiero and D’Amico, 2022). Intellectual activity (as the sign of involvement and

intellectual activity satisfaction) is one more intellectual predictor. The higher the intellectual activity is,

the higher academic success in humanitarian and linguistic (not mathematical or standardized tests)

disciplines is (Hülür et al., 2018).

Intellectual peculiarities being predictors of academic progress are the most important prognostic

indices; they help to make increasingly more accurate prognoses of academic success as students grow

older. At the same time, it is difcult enough and not justied in all cases to rely just on the levels of

intellect, creativity and other cognitive processes development (Dvojnin and Trockaya, 2022).

The more person is oriented on achieving the goal, the higher personal achieving motivation is,

the better educational, cognitive, professional and self-actualization motivation is developed, the higher

students’ success self-esteem is. The success self-esteem is studied as one of the mental representations

of academic success (Eksakusto, Kibalchenko and Duganova, 2022; Karlen, Hirt and Stebner, 2021;

Kornilova, Kornilov and Chumakova, 2009).

The range of non-cognitive (personal) variables is wide enough. Senior high school students’

academic success was found out to be connected with such regulative universal academic activities

as targeting, situation analysis, planning, self-control, correcting and volitional efforts (Dracheva, 2015).

Moreover, there is a consistent positive correlation of educational motivation, scrupulosity and the so-called

“Big ve” factors (extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability and openness) with

academic progress (Albar et al., 2022; Busato et al., 2000).

Self-esteem as well as signicantly positive possible “Self” (including time spent for thinking process,

current achievement strategies, etc.) may be potential predictors of academic success (Tommasi et al.,

2022); possible “Self” is connected with self-development motivation and is the basis for high motivation

for achieving goals in educational sphere (Vasilevskaya and Molchanova, 2021). The level of anxiety

(personal and situational ones) (Bagandova et al., 2018), hardiness (Legostaeva, 2019), learning and

cognitive motivation (Fréchette-Simard et al., 2022), self-efciency and self-direction (Koh et al., 2022),

www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

etc., are also rated as personal predictors of academic success.

If summarizing the results of the academic success intellectual and personal predictors studying,

we may suppose that the method based on integration of these variables is the most advanced and

prospective one. The complex of intellectual and personal features/resources (experience, targeting and

correcting of goals based on this experience, own abilities) but not just separately dened variables

determine the quality of academic progress and success in general. The data achieved during separate

(single) studies support this approach (Smirnov, 2014; von Keyserlingk et al., 2022; Zirenko, 2018).

Mental representations and human ideas are core/basic factors in this approach. Mental representations

(connected with human intellectual and personal peculiarities) are the most important prognostic indices

of potential and current success; they are being set up in a process of life and reect the view of the world,

society and self, formed in a process of life (Kholodnaya, 2019). Thus, metal representations can dene

the efciency of success (in different activity types) actualization (Sipovskaya, 2015; Smirnov, 2014).

Being an operating form of mental experience, refracting through the identity of the subject, mental

representations are characterized by individual resource value and guide a person to achievements,

intentions and correct behavior. If speaking about the system of academic success predictors data,

mental representations inuence on academic success (including its being non-linear) is still insufciently

studied (Kholodnaya, 2020). There are few researches studying metacognitive skills and metacognitive

experience from the point of view of their ability to effect positively on person choosing this or that cognitive

strategy while solving problems and meeting wide range of educational challenges (Savin, 2004; Schuster

et al., 2020; Sipovskaya, 2016; Trifonova, 2021; Volkova and Kholodnaya, 2018).

Such aspects of mental representations as intelligence and personal implicit theories acceptance,

success achievement motivation, “Self” perception, metacognitive knowledge and personal success

self-esteem are of great interest nowadays. Thus, the present research is aimed at studying mental

representations as a subjective form of ongoing processes vision and the students’ academic success

predictors.

The study is based on content analysis, which helped to suggest that a multidimensional effect of

mental representations on the students’ academic success would be found.

So, the core objectives of the study were as follows: to identify cluster groups in accordance with

the indices of mental representations and academic success of students; to determine the inuence

of mental representations characteristics on the students’ academic success and correlations of these

characteristics with the help of regression analysis and to analyze the features of mental representations

of students’ (included into different cluster groups) academic success.

Materials and Methods

Two hundred and twelve students 1st-year students aged 18 and 19 years of Southern Federal

University took part in the research (62% - male students, 38% - female ones). The participants of the

research were chosen from 587 students enrolled in the Basics of Project Management course. Taking

part in the research was of their own volition (they could have withdrawn from participation at any step of

the research; no one decided to recuse) and non-reimbursable.

Empiric research was held in two steps. Deductive and correlative design of the research is dened

here as a general method. It includes the following qualitative and quantitative techniques of the results

processing and interpreting: typing or classication typing method (cluster analysis) was used to organize

students into relatively homogeneous groups pursuant to indices of mental representations and academic

success; multivariate regression analysis was used to analyze mental representations impact on academic

success; comparative analysis (“cross-sectional method”) and statistic criteria were aimed at determining

differences between the groups.

Several methods and techniques were used to dene academic success and mental representations

indices. Students’ questionnaires with the academic progress data was aimed at biographic data

acquisition and students’ educational progress self-report. Implicit theories questionnaire (IT) (Dweck,

Smirnov’s variation) was used to study the indices of such scales as “Stackable” intelligence theory

acceptance”, “Enriched” personality theory acceptance”, “The aims of education acceptance” and

“Education self-estimation”. Students’ success achievement motivation questionnaire (Pakulina) helped

to study such indices as “Success exteriorization” and “Success interiorization”. Personal differential (“My

own self” variant) (Bazhin & Etkind) aimed at getting results for “Assessment” factor (My own self)”,

“Strength” factor (My own self)” and “Activity” factor (My own self)” scales. The scale of success and

satisfaction with life self-esteem (Dembo-Rubinstein variation) helped to study Current, Perfect and

www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

Potential subjective success self-assessment indices. Metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive action

self-esteem methods (Poshekhonova & Kashapov) were aimed at analyzing “Metacognitive knowledge”

and “metacognitive activity” scales. Ranking indices (as academic success complex assessment) were

used as students’ academic success markers. Rating system is used in the University where the research

was held. This system is accessible for students as well as for the University management and allows to

control students’ academic progress (0 to 100 credits) in all subjects during each term. Thus, each student

has an own average academic progress rating.

Results

Cluster analysis was used at the rst step of the research to dene groups homogeneous in levels

of mental representations academic progress variables formation (table 1).

Table 1

Students’ mental representations and academic progress characteristics

Three groups were dened while analyzing dendrogram resulting from clusterization; this fact is the

indicative of tendency to normal distribution with 3.44 % deviation from standard distribution.

First group includes 26 students (12.26 % of the total number) – students with academic progress

average index (67 points); this index shows satisfactory level according to a point rating system (100 % of

students included in this group are characterized by low progress indices). This group can be notionally

called “Average progress” according to criterion of academic progress.

Second group consists of 152 persons (71.7 %) – students with average rating of 85 points, i.e.

excellent level in accordance with the point rating system. This group is characterized by high progress

indices and can be called “High progress: current and potential”. The name of the group detailing is

connected with the fact that 42.1 % of students here are characterized by average progress index, 50 % –

by high academic progress index and 7.9 % of them have satisfactory progress. The number of students

with satisfactory progress index is signicantly smaller that the number of students with average (φ*emp

= 10.82, р=0.01) and high (φ*emp = 9.16, р=0.01) ones. Thus, the average and high academic progress

indices signicantly prevail in this group.

Thirty-four students (16.04 %) form a third group; these students are exemplied by average

academic progress indices: 73 points – a good progress level. This group is notionally called “Conditionally

average progress”. The members of this group are ranged wider that the members of the previous one.

It includes students with non-satisfactory progress – 17.6 %, satisfactory one – 14.7 % (33.1 % in sum),

average (good) progress – 35.3 % and high one – 32.4 %. This group is characterized by academic

progress complete splitting.

It should be also emphasized that the respondents included into second and third groups differ

in academic progress levels. Clusterization procedure shows that these groups include students similar

in mental representations indices variety. The level of students’ mental representations formedness

hypothetically serves as the academic progress indices splitting criterion.

Results analysis showed correlation according to the degree of success mental representations

indices expression described in table 2.

www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

Table 2

The levels of expressiveness of the success mental representations (SMR) indices

The rst group (so called “Average progress”) is characterized by low academic progress as well

as by ill-dened mental representations predictors predominance. However, the students included in this

group show better results and higher indices in such characteristics as “Enriched” personality theory

acceptance”, “Stackable” intelligence theory acceptance”, “The aims of education acceptance” as well

as “Success exteriorization” than the students of the other ones. If comparing to other groups, this one is

close to “Conditionally average progress” in mental representations indices.

The second group (“High progress: current and potential”) differs from other ones; the students

in this group are characterized by average and high academic progress; at the same time, averagely

expressed mental representations tending to high expression prevail here. Two variables (“The aims of

education acceptance” and “Perfect subjective success self-assessment index”) are poorly dened here,

if comparing to other groups.

The third group of students (“Conditionally average progress”) is notable for different levels of

academic progress and poorly expressed mental representations indices. This group’s results in such

variables as “Current subjective success self-assessment index”, “Strength” factor (My own self)”,

“Assessment” factor (My own self)” are higher than the results of students in other groups.

Thus, “High progress: current and potential” group signicantly differs from the other ones in

dominating of averagely and positively expressed mental representations indices. The “Average progress”

group, on the contrary, is characterized by poor expression of these indices. The “Conditionally average

progress” group is in a middle position with average mental representations indices expression. .

Coefcients (the sum equals one) of mental representations characteristics predominating in

splitting equations (Rn) in the levels of expression (H, C, B) were dened while converting percent into

nonintegrals:

group R1 = 0,6Н + 0,27В + 0,13С

group R2 = 0,5С + 0,40В + 0,10Н

group R3 = 0,5Н + 0,30С + 0,20В

These results show the success mental representations indices being non-linearly distributed; this

fact may be proved by regression analysis. These results can be determined by the progress and its

predictor’s correlation being multidimensional and complex.

The second step of the empiric research and a process of different levels of academic progress

denition (regression analysis) helped to determine consistency of regressions and report for models (see

Tables 3-5).

All the used variables are dened as academic progress predictors; they are used in different

hierarchic order; the use of Kruskal-Wallis’s H criterion proves this difference. The dened cluster groups

differ in such indices as “academic progress” (H=55.51, р=0.00); “Education self-estimation” (acting as an

academic success predictor and intellectual success self-presentation) (H=9.51, p=0.01); and “Enriched”

personality theory acceptance” (H=6.95, р=0.01). If analyzing regression models content, note that the

“Activity” factor (My own self)” predictor is the rst one in all groups with averagely equal values (1st

group – 26.6; 2nd group – 25.8; 3rd group – 25.8). This predictor is included into a pleiad with different

hierarchically dominating variables and is safe to be the core sign of young people being active, engrossed

with a life processes (which is typical of this age).

The rst group: “Activity” factor (My own self)” (VAR 14) forms hierarchically signicant complex of

www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

the following predictors: “Strength” factor (My own self)” (VAR 13) (28.15), “Perfect subjective success

self-assessment index” (VAR 10) (9.19) – highest rate in all groups; “Metacognitive activity” (VAR 2) (8.88)

(see Table 3).

Table 3

Regression indices in “Average progress” cluster group

These predictors inuence an academic success no matter the education self-estimation index

is expressed in a signicantly weaker way here comparing to two other groups. Such characteristics

as “The aims of education acceptance” (VAR 5) (the highest rate among groups); “Current subjective

success self-assessment index” (VAR 9); “Enriched” personality theory acceptance” (VAR 4) (also the

highest rate among groups); “Success exteriorization” (VAR 7) (the highest rate among groups, signicant

differences with the 3rd group: U

emp

= 534.5; U

= 620, р = 0.01) have the least impact on the academic

progress of this group participants. The students related to this group are much more stable and show

more academic, cognitive and professional motivation than the students included into the second one.

This group is characterized by the higher expression of the “Stackable” intelligence theory acceptance”

index than in other groups no matter the students included into it are insufciently targeted at studying and

learning skills (U

emp

= 533, U

= 604, р = 0.05).

If speaking about the second group, the “Activity” factor (My own self)” (VAR 14) forms hierarchically

signicant complex linked with such predictors as “Success interiorization” (VAR 8), “Current subjective

success self-assessment index” (VAR 9) and the “Stackable” intelligence theory acceptance” (VAR 3)

(see Table 4).

Table 4

Regression indices in “High progress: current and potential” cluster group

Specic character of the students’ knowledge structures and personal experience has an impact

on their academic success. The students included into this group are active in studying (VAR 14) but are

afraid of challenges, consider them as condition to further intellectual growth as well as the reason of this

growth rate reduction. Such characteristics as “The aims of education acceptance” (VAR 5), “Potential

subjective success self-assessment index” (VAR 9) (in case of own abilities subjective assessment),

“Enriched” personality theory acceptance” (VAR 4) and “Metacognitive knowledge” (VAR 1) have the

least effect on this group students’ progress. It is noteworthy that the “Success interiorization” holds more

expression (U

emp

= 534.5; U

= 620, р = 0.01) in this group than in a third one.

The third cluster group is specic for the “Activity” factor (My own self)” (VAR 14) forming

hierarchically signicant complex with “Metacognitive knowledge” (VAR 1), “Enriched” personality theory

acceptance” (VAR 4) and “Current subjective success self-assessment index” (VAR 9) (see Table 5).

www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

Table 5

Regression indices in “Conditionally Average progress” cluster group

Moreover, “Metacognitive knowledge” and “Enriched” personality theory acceptance” indices are

the academic progress hierarchically valuable predictors. They are much poorly expressed here than

in two previous groups. Such characteristics as “The aims of education acceptance” (VAR 5), “Success

exteriorization” (VAR 7) and “Stackable” intelligence theory acceptance” (VAR 3) are formed better than in

the second group, but have little effect on academic progress of students. Signicantly higher “Ego self”

index (U

emp

= 330.5; U

= 331, р = 0.01) is specic of the students of this group.

Discussions

According to the results of the rst stage of the study, one can conclude that the second group (“High

progress: current and potential”) and the third one (“Conditionally Average progress”) are characterized

by high mental representations indices; on the other side, academic progress quantitative indices are

splitting and dividing into opposite sub-elds. That is, in case of sufciently high quantitative indices of

mental representations characteristics, opposite academic progress indices are observed. If speaking

about the rst group “Average progress” there is a reverse effect. Low academic success index became a

measure of mental representations indices splitting; mental representations indices are expressed at low,

average and high levels here. According to modern researches (Kholodnaya, 2020), intelligence (namely,

mental representations) indices, no matter they are of high, average or low levels, can be associated

with both high and low academic progress of students. Consequently, success indices of high, average

and low levels as well as success mental representations “split” into different areas depending on the

underlying productive or non-productive components. This fact is proved by some modern researches as

well (Dyupina, 2021; Kibalchenko, Eksakusto and Chegodaeva, 2021).

The complex of predictors of the rst “Average progress” group were analyzed at the second stage

of the research. The resource link of the students included into this group is strong; i.e. they are able

to focus on the process of teaching and getting skills; to assess intelligence objectively and to change

internal mental action into an external one. However, they scarcely use this resource strong link in an

educational activity.

Moreover, there is a contradiction: on the one hand, students demonstrate greater (comparing to

others) stability and belief in their development and the achievement motivation expressiveness; on the

other hand, they tend to consider themselves (situationally) unsuccessful; to be unstable in choosing and

using effective metastrategies of learning, self-regulation skills and irrational in using school time (Volkova

and Kholodnaya, 2018). They have problems with realizing correct means of information obtaining and

processing, strategies and requirements for problems solving, etc. In other words, there is a contradiction

between the implicit nature of evaluating one’s efforts and the existing metacognitive resource. It is fair

to assume that the correlation of low-level metaknowledge and implicit aspirations for one’s personality

“enrichment” make it difcult to change one’s own action from internal to external one. In other words,

there is an inversion phenomenon in this group, i.e. these students have high cognitive performance, but

other (non-cognitive) indices are low, i.e. the index of knowledge is highly developed, but the procedural

side of the activity is underused (Cheng and Cheung, 2005).

Differences in the success interiorization index expression intensity detected in the second group

(students with high progress) are expressed in the following understanding of success: the success

is personal, depends on personal achievements; it is perceived as a result of personal activity, as a

specic mental state as well as difculties overcoming and vocational aptitude. The students of this group

(opposed to the students of other ones) consider success as a positive result in studying and working.

Meanwhile, the indices of “The aims of education acceptance”, “Enriched” personality theory acceptance”

www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

and “Metacognitive knowledge” are of lower level than in two other groups. That is why the students of

this group use these indices in an educational activity less frequently. Thus, according to metacognitive

theory, there is a difference between person’s metacognitive knowledge (understood as the vision of own

thinking process) and the strategies being factors of metacognitive activity. This activity tend to increase.

That is why the students with high progress can change the ways of information processing from peculiar

focus (result) to metacognitive one; this fact helps to develop their cognitive processes perception (Moritz

and Woodward, 2007).

The students of “Conditionally average progress” group show the lowest level of the implicit theory

acceptance index expression. This fact characterizes these students as those who nd it difcult to assess

their learning efforts; have weak achieving motivation, insufciently developed educational and cognitive

motives and motives of creative self-actualization. Arguably, they do not work enough on themselves and

on changing their personal characteristics. They differ from the other groups of students by lower potential

success self-assessment index and subjective assessment of their abilities; i.e. they underestimate their

capabilities because their abilities metacognitive awareness is poorly formed.

The results of the research let us conclude that the students of all three groups are situationally

(inconsistently) oriented on the “Enriched” personality implicit theory acceptance”. They nd it difcult

to assess their learning efforts; do not work enough on themselves and on changing their “enriched”

personality characteristics. The motives of creative self-actualization are underdeveloped in all three

groups; but the level of this development differs (1

group – 5.35; 2

group – 2.18, 3

group – 1.94).

There is an interesting tendency if speaking about the “Stackable” intelligence theory acceptance”: the

students of all three groups are highly oriented on studying and getting professional skills (1

group –

9.38; 2

group – 7.38, 3

group – 8.2). The students are not afraid of challenges and consider difculties

as conditions of further intellectual growth. There is some ambivalence: on the one hand, students do not

work enough on themselves and their personal qualities, they do not believe that there are no limits for

personal development; on the other hand, they believe in intellectual development and the intelligence

“growth” during the process of studying. This conclusion aligns with modern studies of mental abilities and

their non-linear connection with academic and life success (Kholodnaya and Sipovskaya, 2023; Ushakov,

2011).

One more tendency was found out during the study: the lower the level of academic success

index is, the higher the index of the success exteriorization is. Such external characteristics of success

as high nancial level of life and high social status (honours, power, etc.) become much more important

for students. The result is specic because the students participated in the research are the future IT-

specialists; they are interested in being employed as early as it is possible (most of them get jobs while

being the rst- or second-year students of Universities). The quality of their educational activity runs low

and educational self-esteem decreases (the average point rating also reduces); but their nancial well-

being (helping to focus on success internal attributes) increases.

The lack of signicant differences of such characteristics as “Self” assessment”, “Self” activity”,

“Metacognitive knowledge” and “Metacognitive activity” indicates the fact that despite the differences

between success and progress mental representations, the students of all groups have almost the same

educational experience and level of knowledge; act almost identically in social and educational spheres.

The students of all groups tend to value their current success at a quite low rate (5 points out of 10)

regardless of their academic success. This is an indirect sign of the fact that modern young people

(including future IT-specialists) do not consider getting education at the higher professional education

establishment and average mark as being the bases of success (successful studying and professional

success do not correlate with each other in their opinions). Nevertheless, the average assessment of

perfect success in all groups equals 9 points (of 10), while potential success assessment (taking into

account all the abilities) is at the rate of 8 points (out of 10); i.e. almost all young people are skeptic about

their abilities and future achievements.

Thus, this research identies the impact of mental representations characteristics on the students’

academic success. This fact conrms the hypothesis of the study. Furthermore, the content of mental

representations has rather a complex and ambiguous impact on students’ academic success, which is

more characteristic of students with low academic progress level. The phenomenon, when some separate

indices of mental representations (“Enriched” personality and intelligence theory acceptance, “The aims

of education acceptance” and “Belief in personal potential success acceptance) are highly-developed but

the quality of education is low and students nd it difcult to use their resources, is called an inversion

effect. This effect reects a multidimensionality of mental representations impact on academic success.

As a result, it is necessary to carry out an additional research (factor analysis in particular) to study

variability of mental representations as academic success predictors.

www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

Conclusions

This research shows that studying mental representations (being success predictors) as well as

their impact on the students’ academic success is topical nowadays. Three groups of students were

dened in a process of diagnostic results clustering: “High progress: current and potential”, “Conditionally

average progress” and “Average progress”.

The students with low academic progress accept more personal and intelligence implicit theories

and have low education self-assessment. This fact shows discrepancy between implicit character of

personal efforts assessment and current metacognitive resource. Therefore, those mental representations

characteristics, which are formed and developed better, have a minimal impact on academic success in

accordance with the regression model. Low level of academic progress becomes the measure of mental

representations characteristics splitting in this group. Mental representations indices, connected with low

academic progress, are expressed on low, average and high levels.

A full picture of educational indices (high, average, satisfactory and unsatisfactory) splitting is

found in a group of students with “conditionally average progress”. The “Self” power” index is maximally

expressed here and its impact becomes one of the peculiarities of the indices splitting. The students of

this group are supposed to be more self-condent and tenacious (they choose this variable more often

than the students in other groups do) because they have to be more impregnable during an educational

process and to put up a good shew in conditions of average cognitive abilities. The index of “Enriched”

personality theory acceptance is poorly expressed in this group. Therefore, these students nd it difcult to

assess their own abilities and to change their personal characteristics while studying. Their achievement

motivation and self-improvement are underdeveloped.

The students of “High progress: current and potential” group are characterized by having high

mental representations characteristics indices; nevertheless, academic progress quantitative indices are

splitting and dividing into opposite sub-elds. One of the basic predictors in this group is internal structures

forming by the way of auditory material retention, life experience gaining and general development of

a person. The effect of metacognitive theory may be observed here; i.e. the better the metacognitive

strategies comparing to metacognitive knowledge are formed, the better the conditions for cognitive

processes, new knowledge developing, own academic and general success recognizing are.

Mental representations impact on the students’ academic success was indicated in general. This

impact is multidimensional, ambiguous and worth further studying. It may help to create highly effective

psychological technologies for mental representations of general and academic success development.

Acknowledgements

We greatly appreciate the contribution of the Psychology and Life Safety department staff as well

as our colleagues from the Institute of Computer Technologies and Information Safety of the Southern

Federal University in realizing the ideas pointed out in our article.

Conict of interests

The authors declare no conict of interest.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I. A. K., T. V. E.; Investigation, I. A. K., T. V. E.; Data curation,I. A. K.; Methodology,

I. A. K.; Writing – original draft, T. V. E.; Writing – review & editing, T. V. E.. All authors have read and

agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

References

Albar, R. A., Mohamed, A. M., Albarazi, M. A., McAleer, S., & Shaibah, H. S. (2022). Interplay between personality traits

and learning strategies: the missing link. Advances in Physiology Education, 46(4), 637-646. https://doi.org/10.1152/

advan.00001.2022

Aydin B., & Demirer V. (2022). Are ipped classrooms less stressful and more successful? An experimental study on college

students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/

s41239-022-00360-8

Bagandova, G. Kh., Ibragimova, L.A. & Shamkhalova, A.E. (2018). Исследование влияния уровня тревожности личности

www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

на успешность учебно деятельности школьников в отечественно психологии [Research on the person’s anxiety

level impact on school students academic success in native Psychology]. Известия Дагестанского государственного

педагогического университета. Психолого-педагогические науки, 12(4), 5–9. https://doi.org/.31161/1995-0659-

2018-12-4-5-9

Bakanov, A. S. & Zelenova, M. E. (2015). Когнитивно-стилевые детерминанты успешности профессионально

деятельности [Cognitive and style determinants of success in professional activity]. Социальная психология и

общество, 6(2), 61–75.

Bezerra, R. L. M., Alves, R. J. R., & Azoni, C. A. S. (2022). Creativity and its relationship with intelligence and reading skills in

children: an exploratory study. Psicologia: Reexao e Critica, 35(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-022-00221-3

Blume, F., Irmer, A., Dirk, J., & Schmiedek, F. (2022). Day-to-day variation in students’ academic success: The role of self-

regulation, working memory, and achievement goals. Developmental Science, 25(6). https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13301

Bouchefra, S., Azeroual, A., Boudassamout, H., Ahaji, K., Echchaouy, A., & Bour, A. (2022). Association between Non-Verbal

Intelligence and Academic Performance of Schoolchildren from Taza, Eastern Morocco. Journal of Intelligence, 10(3),

1-11. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence10030060

Busato, V.V., Prins, F.J., Elshout, J.J., & Hamaker, C. (2000). Intellectual ability, learning style, personality, achievement

motivation and academic success of psychology students in higher education. Personality and Individual Differences,

29(6), 1057–1068. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00253-6

Cheng C., Cheung M.W.L. (2005). Cognitive processes underlying coping exibility: differentiation and integration. Journal of

Personality, 73(4), 859–886. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00331.x

Dehghani, M., Sani, H.J., Pakmehr, H., & Malekzadeh, A. (2011). Relationship between Students’ Critical Thinking and Self-

efcacy Beliefs in Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2952-2955.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.221

Dracheva, E. Yu. (2015). Влияние регулятивных универсальных учебных дестви на успешность обучения

старшеклассников по индивидуальным учебным планам различно направленности [Regulative universal

academic activities inuence on secondary school children academic success while studying on the bases of different

personal curricula]. Качество. Инновации. Образование, 9(124), 3–7.

Dvojnin, A.M., & Trockaya, E.S. (2022). Когнитивные предикторы академическо успешности: как общие закономерности

«работают» на ранних этапах образования? [Cognitive predictors of academic success: how common factors work

at early stages of getting education]. Психологическая наука и образование, 27(2), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.17759/

pse.2022270204

Dweck, S. C. (2015). Carol Dweck Revisits the «Growth Mindset». Education Week, 35(05), 20–24. Retrieved from https://

www.studentachievement.org/wp-content/uploads/Carol-Dweck-Revisits-the-Growth-Mindset.pdf

Dyupina, S.A. (2021). Изучение особенносте личности студентов в рамках расщепления полюсов когнитивного стиля

аналитичность/синтетичность [Studying peculiarities of students’ personality in analyticity/syntheticity cognitive style

elds splitting]. Вестник Костромского государственного университета. Серия: Педагогика. Психология.

Социокинетика, 27(1), 59-64. https://doi.org/10.34216/2073-1426-2021-27-1-59-64.

Eksakusto, T. Kibalchenko, I., & Duganova, Yu. (2022). Интеллектуально-личностные факторы самооценки обучения

студентов: системны анализ [Intellectual and personal factors of students’ education self-esteem: system analysis].

Системная психология и социология, 3(43), 85-99. https://doi.org/10.25688/2223-6872.2022.43.3.08.

Fréchette-Simard, C., Plante, I., Duchesne, S., & Chaffee, K. E. (2022). The mediating role of test anxiety in the evolution

of motivation and achievement of students transitioning from elementary to high school. Contemporary Educational

Psychology, 71, 102116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2022.102116

Freiberg-Hoffmann, A., Romero-Medina, A., Ledesma, R., & Fernández-Liporace, M. (2022). Psychoeducational Factors

Associated with University Students’ Success and Failure. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Leadership Studies,

3(3), 90 – 106. https://doi.org/10.52547/johepal.3.3.90

Gaponova, G.I. & Popova, D. P. (2016). Изучение представлени студентов о компетентности во времени [Studying

students’ vision of “Competence” at different times]. Кубанский социально-экономический институт, 2-3(26-27),

108–114.

Giancola, M., Palmiero M., & D’Amico, S. (2022). Exploring the interplay between uid intelligence and creativity: the mediating

role of the eld-dependent-independent cognitive style. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 45(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

tsc.2022.101047

Goegan, L. D., & Daniels, L. M. (2021). Academic Success for Students in Postsecondary Education: The Role of Student

Characteristics and Integration. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 23(3), 659 –

685. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025119866689

Hülür, G., Gasimova, F., Robitzsch, A., & Wilhelm, O. (2018). Change in Fluid and Crystallized Intelligence and Student

Achievement: The Role of Intellectual Engagement. Child Development, 89(4), 1074–1087. https://doi.org/10.1111/

cdev.12791

Ishkov, A.D. (2019). Учебная деятельность студента: психологические факторы успешности [Student’s educational

activity: psychological factors of success]. Москва: Флинта.

Karlen Y., Hirt K., Stebner F. (2021). Тheories of self-regulated learning abilities: the importance of implicit theories and self-

assessment of abilities for learning and academic performance. Unterrichts wissenschaft, 49(4), 503-524.

Kholodnaya, M.A. (2019). Психология интеллекта [Psychology of intelligence]. Парадоксы исследования: учебное пособие

для бакалавриата и магистратуры (3-е изд.). Москва: «Юрат».

Kholodnaya, M.A. (2020). Многомерная природа показателе интеллекта и креативности: методические и теоретические

следствия [Multidimensional nature of intelligence and creativity indices: methodic and theoretic consequences].

Психологический журнал, 41(3), 18–31. https://doi.org/10.31857/S020595920009342-2.

Kholodnaya, M.A., Sipovskaya, Ya. I. (2023). Понятийные способности: теория, диагностика, эмпирика [Cognitive

abilities: theory, diagnostics, empirics]. Москва: Изд-во «Институт психологии РАН», 172. https://doi.org/10.38098/

mng_23_0458

Kibalchenko, I., Eksakusto, T. & Chegodaeva, K. (2021). Peculiarities of the students’ conceptual structures and basic beliefs

www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

correlation. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 9(1), 37-

50. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2021-9-1-37-50.

Koh, J., Farruggia, S. P., Back, L. T., & Han, C. (2022). Self-efcacy and academic success among diverse rst-generation

college students: The mediating role of self-regulation. Social Psychology of Education, 25(5), 1071 – 1092. https://doi.

org/10.1007/s11218-022-09713-7

Kornilova, T. V., Kornilov, S. A. & Chumakova M. A. (2009). Subjective evaluations of intelligence and academic self-concept

predict academic achievement: Evidence from a selective student population. Learning and Individual Differences, 19

(4), 596–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.08.001

Larkina, A.A. (2021, July). Уровень развития познавательной сферы как причина успешности – не успешности в

учебной деятельности [The level of cognitive sphere development as the basis of being successful/unsuccessful in

educational activity]. Материалы всероссиско научно-теоретическо конференции «Современные технологии

в образовании: актуальные проблемы и тенденции». Ижевск: Частное образовательное учреждение высшего

образования «Восточно-Европески институт».

Lavrijsen, J., Preckel, F., Verachtert, P., Vansteenkiste, M., & Verschueren, K. (2021). Are motivational benets of adequately

challenging schoolwork related to students’ need for cognition, cognitive ability, or both? Personality and Individual

Differences, 171(3): 110558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110558

Legostaeva, E.S. (2019). Жизнестокость, самооценка и мотивация как личностные факторы успешности обучения

старшеклассников [Resiliency, self-esteem and motivation as personal factors of senior high school students’

academic success]. Педагогическое образование в России, 8, 149–156. https://doi.org/10.26170/po19-08-19.

Lewis, N.A., Jr. & Yates, J. F. (2019). Preparing Disadvantaged Students for Success in College: Lessons Learned From the

Preparation Initiative. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(1) 54–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691618808515

Li J., & Li Y. (2021). The Role of Grit on Students’ Academic Success in Experiential Learning Context. Frontiers in Psychology,

12, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.774149

Mafarja, N., & Zulnaidi, H. (2022). Relationship between Critical thinking and academic self- concept: An experimental study of

Reciprocal teaching strategy. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 45(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101113

Martin, A. J., Burns, E. C., Collie, R. J. Cutmore, M., MacLeod, S., & Donlevy, V. (2022). The role of engagement in immigrant

students’ academic resilience. Learning and Instruction, 82, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101650

Moritz, S., & Woodward, T. (2007) Metacognitive training in schizophrenia: from basic research to knowledge translation and

intervention. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 20(6), 619 – 625. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0b013e3282f0b8ed

Nadtochyy, E. (2017, март). The concept of «success» in social and communicative aspects. Сборник материалов

I Молодежного научного форума с международным участием Profmarket: Educatin. Language. Success

(Profmarket: Образование. Язык. Успех). Севастополь: ФГАОУ ВО Севастопольски государственны

университет

Postavnev, V.M., Postavneva, I.V., Dvoynin, A.M. & Romanova, M.A. (2020). Общие и частные когнитивные способности как

предикторы академическо успешности ребенка на ранних этапах образования [General and peculiar cognitive

abilities as predictors of child’s academic success at the early stages of studying]. Вестник Московского городского

педагогического университета. Серия: Педагогика и психология, 4, 64–73. https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-

9121.2020.54.4.05

Ratu, А, Rai, N. G. M., & Savitri, E. D. (2021). Excellent academic achievement: Do intellectual humility and emotional intelligence

matter? Cakrawala Pendidikan: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan, 40(2), 265–278. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v40i2.35588

Romero-Galisteo, R.-P., González-Sánchez, M., Gálvez-Ruiz, P., Palomo-Carrión, R., Casuso-Holgado, M.J., & Pinero-Pinto,

E. (2022). Entrepreneurial intention, expectations of success and self-efcacy in undergraduate students of health

sciences. BMC Medical Education, 22(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03731-x

Roshchevskaya, E.V. (2013). Проблема коммуникативного ресурса как детерминанты успешности профессионального

становления специалистов антропоцентрированных професси [The problem of communicative resource studied

as a determinant of antropocentrated specialists’ professional success]. Гуманитарные и социальные науки, 4,

236–245. Retreived from https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/problema-kommunikativnogo-resursa-kak-determinanty-

uspeshnosti-professionalnogo-stanovleniya-spetsialistov-antropotsentrirovannyh/viewer

Savin, E.Yu. (2004). Понятины и метакогнитивны опыт как основа интеллектуально компетентности в научно

деятельности [Cognitive and metacognitive experience as the basis of an intellectual competence in scientic activi-

ty]. Психологический журнал, 25(5), 50–59. Retreived from http://evgenysavin.ru/_ld/0/13_AVTREF1.pdf

Schuster, C., Stebner, F., Leutner, D., & Wirth, J. (2020). Transfer of metacognitive skills in self-regulated learning: an

experimental training study. Metacognition and Learning, 15(3), 455-477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09237-5

Sipovskaya, Ya. I. (2015). Metacognitive structure of intellectual competence in late adolescence. Sibirskiy psikhologicheskiy

zhurnal. 12(01), 76–87. https://doi.org/10.17223/17267080/58/5

Sipovskaya, Ya. I. (2016). Понятиные, метакогнитивные и интенциональные способности в структуре интеллектуально

компетентности [Cognitive, metacognitive and intentional abilities in a structure of an intellectual competence]. Thesis,

Cand. Sc. Psychology. М.: Институт психологии РАН.

Smirnov, S.D. (2014). Показатели интеллектуального потенциала студентов как предикторы успешности обучения в

вузе [Signs of students’ intellectual potential as predictors of their studying at the Higher Professional Educational

Establishments success]. Вестник Московского университета. Серия 20: Педагогическое образование, 3, 19–41.

https://doi.org/10.51314/2073-2635-2014-3-19-41

Sokolova, L.B. & Khudoteplova, E.N. (2017). Процесс формирования учебно успешности во внеурочно деятельности

[Process of academic success forming during extracurricular activity]. Kant, 1(22). 69–74.

Swanson, E., & Cole, D. (2022). The Role of Academic Validation in Developing Mattering and Academic Success. Research

in Higher Education, 63(8), 1368 – 1393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09686-8

Tommasi, M., Loforese, F., Sergi, M. R., Arnò, S., Picconi, L., & Saggino, A. (2022). Scholastic psychological well-being and

irrational thoughts in students of primary and secondary school: An Italian study. Acta Psychologica, 23. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103787

Trifonova, A.V. (2021). Взаимосвязь когнитивных способносте и копинг-стратеги у будущих специалистов [Future

www.ijcrsee.com

Kibalchenko, I., & Eksakusto, T. (2023). Mental Representations as The Students’ Academic Success Predictor, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 51-62.

specialists cognitive abilities and coping strategies correlation]. Наукосфера. 12(1). https://doi.org/10.5281/

zenodo.5783370

Ushakov, D.V. (2011). Психология интеллекта и одаренности [Psychology of intelligence and genius]. Москва: Изд-во

«Институт психологии РАН», 464 (Экспериментальные исследования) ISBN 978-5-9270-0218-4;

Vasilevskaya, E. Yu. & Molchanova, O.N. (2021). Возможные «Я» и академическая мотивация у россиских и

американских студентов университета [Possible “I” and academic motivation of Russian and American University

students]. Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики, 18(2), 352–365. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-

2021-2-352-365

Volkova, N.E., Kholodnaya, M.A. (2018). Понятиные способности как фактор осознания ресурсных возможносте

разных стратеги совладания [Cognitive abilities as factors of different coping strategies capabilities realizing]. Мир

психологии, 2(94), 191–201. Retreived from https://www.mpsu.ru/upload/iblock/286/2868b7d8532b54af41f8bab0001

7c274.pdf#page=191

von Keyserlingk, L., Rubach, C., Lee, H. R., Eccles, J. S., & Heckhausen, J. (2022). College Students’ motivational beliefs and

use of goal-oriented control strategies: Integrating two theories of motivated behavior. Motivation and Emotion, 46(5),

601 – 620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-022-09957-y.

Welsch, D. M., & Zimmer, D. (2018). Do High School Gifted Programs Lead to Later-in-Life Success? Journal of labor research

39(2), 201-218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12122-017-9252-9

Zirenko, M.S. (2018). Implicit theories of intelligence and personality: Relations to intelligence, motivation and personality.

Psychology, Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 15(1), 39–53. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2018-1-

39-53