The Triarchic Model of Grit Is Linked to Academic Success and Well-Being among Filipino High School Students

Acknowledgement: Jesus Alfonso D. Datu is now at the Department of Special Education and Counselling, The Education University of Hong Kong.
The manuscript is based on the PhD dissertation project of Jesus Alfonso D. Datu under the supervision of Mantak Yuen and Gaowei Chen.

Achieving educational success normally entails setting, planning, and implementing long-term goals. The attractive benefits of pursuing temporally remote ambitions have encouraged researchers to explore how positive noncognitive traits may relate to academic outcomes. Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, and Kelly (2007) have developed the “grit” construct to describe individual differences in passion and perseverance for remote aspirations. Grit is comprised of two major dimensions: consistency of interests (sustained interests in behaviors that can lead to goal achievement) and perseverance of effort (enduring the hardships and failures to achieve long-term goals). Individuals with high levels of grit tend to maintain elevated levels of interests and effort even with the difficulties, failures, and obstacles that they may experience in achieving long-term goals (Duckworth et al., 2007). While some people may shift from one goal to another after facing hardships, gritty ones are likely to demonstrate unwavering persistence to accomplish a specific goal in the absence of any immediate incentives or feedback. The authors have shown that grit promoted adaptive outcomes such as academic and work-related accomplishments even after controlling for the influence of relevant covariates (e.g., demographic variables and Big Five personality factors).

Despite the promising lines of evidence about the promising effects of grit, recent literature has raised a number of criticisms on the existing grit theory. First, measurement issues have been raised on the hypothesized two-factor model of grit with consistency of interests and perseverance of effort as major dimensions (Credé, Tynan, & Harms, 2017; Datu, Yuen, & Chen, 2017a). Second, perseverance of effort has been more strongly linked than consistency of interests to academic performance after controlling for the influence of conscientiousness (Credé et al., 2017). Third, consistency of interests did not predict positive academic and well-being outcomes (see Datu et al., 2017a for a review). Studies have mostly documented the link of grit to academic and nonacademic outcomes in Western societies. Issues regarding the theorizing, assessment, and validity of the grit construct point to the need to investigate the theoretical robustness of grit in various cultural contexts. Indeed, more studies are needed to explore alternative models of grit, especially in non-Western and collectivist contexts.

Therefore, the current research adopted the TMG to examine the association of grit with academic functioning (Study 1) and well-being outcomes (Study 2) among Filipino high school students. Furthermore, the indirect effects of grit on academic engagement (i.e., agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement) via academic motivation (i.e., amotivation, controlled, and autonomous motivation) were explored in Study 1 to provide a concrete psychological mechanism that could link grit to academic functioning.

Recognizing the theoretical and methodological criticisms against the existing two-factor model of grit, Datu, Yuen, and Chen (2016) have provided a preliminary evidence on the TMG among Filipino students through a qualitative study. The TMG has proposed that there are three dimensions that have characterized grit in a collectivist setting (i.e., Philippines) namely, consistency of interests, perseverance of effort, and adaptability to situations. Although the definitions of consistency and perseverance are consistent with Duckworth et al.’s (2007) grit framework, findings of the study have demonstrated that adaptability to situations, which pertains to the capability to efficiently adjust with life’s ever-changing conditions, emerged as a new dimension of grit. These findings point to the possibility that grit may have a distinct conceptual meaning for individuals in a collectivist context (i.e., Philippine setting).

To assess individual differences in grit based on the aforementioned framework, Datu, Yuen, and Chen (2017b) developed the 10-item Triarchic Model of Grit Scale (TMGS). The authors have demonstrated that the scores from TMGS were valid, reliable, and invariant across gender among selected Filipino university students, mostly belonging to the adolescent phase. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of the consistency, perseverance, and adaptability dimensions were 0.78, .60, and .88, respectively. In terms of its criterion-related validity, the results have shown that perseverance and adaptability were associated with conscientiousness, academic self-efficacy, career exploration self-efficacy, and talent development self-efficacy. As expected, consistency was not linked to the aforementioned criterion measures. Yet, little is known on how the overall grit score from this framework may be linked to a wide array of academic and nonacademic outcomes.

There are two lines of evidence that can support the applicability of the newly added dimension of grit (i.e., adaptability to situations) especially in a collectivist context. First, the self-construal theory (Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Vignoles et al., 2016) has postulated that individuals in collectivist societies are likely to adopt an interdependent view of self. One of the important characteristics of those with high levels of interdependent self-construal involves demonstrating different behaviors depending on what actions are needed in a specific scenario. Second, the extant literature has posited that collectivists tend to adopt a context-sensitive self (Suh, 2007) which increases the likelihood of engaging in cognitions, emotions, and actions that are contingent on situational demands. Clearly, these findings point to the theoretical value of adopting the TMG in collectivist societies.

Existing literature has shown that the two-factor model of grit may be associated with desirable student outcomes. Grit has been linked to higher academic performance among undergraduate and graduate students (Bowman, Hill, Denson, & Bronkema, 2015; Duckworth et al., 2007; Rimfeld, Kovas, Dale, & Plomin, 2016), school motivation (Eskreis-Winkler, Shulman, Beal, & Duckworth, 2014), academic engagement in the case of university and high school students (Datu, Valdez, & King, 2016), deliberate practice in spelling among quiz bee participants (Duckworth, Kirby, Tsukayama, Berstein, & Ericsson, 2011), self-regulation among university students (Wolters & Hussain, 2015), subjective well-being in university and nonuniversity students (Datu, Valdez, & King, 2016; Jin & Kim, 2017; Singh & Jha, 2008), and psychological well-being among university students and nonstudent samples (Vainio & Daukantaitė, 2016).

Grit may boost academic achievement and success due to a number of reasons. Wolters and Hussain (2015) have found that grit positively predicted academic achievement because of the mediating function of self-regulation in a sample of United States undergraduate students. Furthermore, grit has been linked to the possibility of advancing to the final round of a spelling quiz bee competition among primary and secondary school students in different societies (e.g., United States, New Zealand, Puerto Rico, etc.) due to the mediating effects of study time (Duckworth et al., 2007) and cumulative hours of practice (Duckworth & Quinn, 2009). These findings indicate that grittier students are more likely to spend more time in mastering a specific task to achieve optimal levels of performance. Grit has been also associated with higher levels of academic conscientiousness (Eskreis-Winkler et al., 2014) as well as lower levels of academic procrastination (Schmidt, Fleckenstein, Retelsdorf, Eskreis-Winkler, & Möller, 2017).

Even with the burgeoning lines of research that examined the nomological network of grit, previous studies have primarily focused on exploring how the two-factor model of grit may predict various indicators of academic functioning. As the TMG has incorporated adaptability to situations as a major facet of grit, it is important to examine how this newly developed model of grit may predict a wide range of academic, nonacademic, and even well-being outcomes. However, we do not know of any research which assessed the potential association of the TMG with key learning processes and outcomes. An exception involves the study of Datu et al. (2017b) that explored how the TMG was related to academic self-efficacy among Filipino university students. Further, little is known about the psychological processes that can explain why this model of grit may relate to academic success and well-being.

The engine theory of well-being (Jayawickreme, Forgeard, & Seligman, 2012) serves as our theoretical rationale for proposing that grit may influence various indicators of positive academic functioning (Study 1) and well-being outcomes (Study 2). The framework has posited that there are different classes (i.e., input, process, and outcome variables) of variables that contribute to better understanding about the predictors and consequences of well-being. Input variables pertain to intrinsic qualities or traits (e.g., gratitude, kindness, and wisdom) and extrinsic resources (e.g., socioeconomic status and social support) that optimize well-being. Process variables refer to internal psychological conditions that impact decisions which individuals make such as self-efficacy and motivational states. Outcome variables pertain to “voluntary behaviors that characterize well-being: positive relationships; positive accomplishment; engagement in work, love, or play, authentic, autonomous behavior; and meaningful activity” (Jayawickreme et al., 2012, p. 329). This framework has pointed out that the ability of specific intrinsic or extrinsic input variables to optimize positive internal states (i.e., process variables) elucidates why input variables indirectly impact on outcome variables. For example, it is possible that optimism (input variable) can lead to higher levels of work engagement (outcome variable) because optimistic tendencies may promote work self-efficacy (process variable).

In this research, we conceptualized the TMG as an input variable because previous studies have demonstrated that the existing model of grit has been associated with higher levels of subjective well-being (Datu, Valdez, & King, 2016; Vainio & Daukantaitė, 2016). It is expected that TMG may be linked to outcome variables like self-reported engagement indices (i.e., agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement) through the process variable academic motivational orientations (i.e., amotivation, controlled, and autonomous motivation) in Study 1. It is possible that academic motivation may operate as a process variable because motivation is an internal psychological state that reflects one’s reason for studying (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Shahar, Henrich, Blatt, Ryan, & Little, 2003). Similarly, we operationalized grit as an input variable that may be related to subjective well-being, interdependent happiness, and psychological distress in Study 2.

The current research explored how grit may be linked to several indicators of optimal academic functioning and well-being in the Philippine setting. It is interesting to determine the linkage of grit to positive student outcomes for a number of reasons. For instance, previous literature has noted that the Philippines is considered a collectivist context (Datu, 2015; Hofstede, 2001). In collectivist cultures, individuals are commonly expected to place much value on establishing and maintaining harmonious relationships (Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Vignoles et al., 2016). Therefore, it is an essential direction to look at how Western-derived positive psychological constructs like grit would operate in non-Western and interdependent sociocultural settings. However, little research has been conducted to examine how grit relates to positive outcomes and previous research concentrated on the nomological network of the two-factor model of grit in the Philippines (Datu, Valdez, & King, 2016).

The overarching aim of the present research was to assess the association of grit with different educational and well-being outcomes. Study 1 examined the link of grit to self-reported academic engagement. Furthermore, the indirect effects of grit on perceived academic engagement domains via academic motivation were also investigated.

Regarding academic motivation, we used the three-factor model of academic motivation based on the major assumptions of the self-determination theory (Shahar et al., 2003). There are three dimensions that characterize academic motivation namely: amotivation, controlled, and autonomous motivation. Amotivation refers to absence or lack of motivation to engage in academic activities. Controlled motivation pertains to drive to perform educational tasks to earn concrete incentives (external regulation) or refrain from feeling guilty for not doing such tasks (introjected regulation). Autonomous motivation refers to the drive to perform academic activities because studying corroborates with personal values (identified regulation) and such academic tasks are intrinsically fulfilling (integrated regulation). The framework has posited that autonomous motivation is the most optimal type of motivation. Previous literature has shown that whereas amotivation was linked to maladaptive academic outcomes (i.e., low levels of academic achievement), controlled and autonomous motivation were linked to higher academic engagement and achievement (Datu, King, & Valdez, 2016; Guay, Ratelle, Roy, & Litalien, 2010; Jang, Kim, & Reeve, 2012).

Academic engagement refers to how deeply students are involved in the educational contexts (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004). Academic engagement is an essential educational outcome because previous studies have demonstrated that engagement predicted academic achievement (Dotterer & Lowe, 2011; Reeve & Tseng, 2011). In the study, we adopted the four-factor engagement framework (Reeve & Tseng, 2011). Behavioral engagement refers to how well students want to actively perform academic tasks. Cognitive engagement pertains to the degree to which students want to use cognitive and metacognitive strategies when dealing with school-related activities. Emotional engagement refers to the extent to which students experience positive emotions in performing academic activities. Agentic engagement pertains to the degree to which students proactively contribute to classroom discussions such as proposing suggestions on how to enhance the teacher’s instructional strategies.

Study 2 explored the relationship of grit to various indicators of well-being. In particular, the associations of grit with subjective well-being domains (i.e., life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect), interdependent happiness, and psychological distress after controlling for demographic covariates and neuroticism were assessed. Although previous research has demonstrated that grit was linked to subjective well-being (Datu, Valdez, & King, 2016), a limitation of this investigations involved reliance on the two-factor model of grit and how it was linked to well-being. Our research also explored that link of grit to interdependent happiness and psychological distress which may provide new insights on the association of grit with optimal psychological health.

Interdependent happiness pertains to “global, subjective assessment of whether one is interpersonally harmonized with other people, being quiescent, and being ordinary, and connected to the collective way of well-being” (Hitokoto & Uchida, 2015, p. 214). It is considered as an important outcome in collectivist societies because in such cultural milieus, individuals tend to espouse an interpersonal definition of happiness (Uchida & Ogihara, 2012). Psychological distress refers to the degree to which individuals are experiencing concrete mental health issues like anxiety, depression, and lack of concentration, among others (Goldberg & Williams, 1988; Graetz, 1991).

The aim of Study 1 was to examine the link of grit to academic motivation and engagement. This investigation also explored the potential indirect effects of grit on self-reported academic engagement domains (i.e., agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement) through the intermediate variables academic motivation.

The following hypotheses were proposed in the study:
Hypothesis 1: Grit will be positively associated with agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement after controlling for demographic covariates and conscientiousness.
Hypothesis 2: Grit will be positively linked to autonomous and controlled motivation after controlling for demographic covariates and conscientiousness.
Hypothesis 3: Grit will be negatively correlated with amotivation after controlling for demographic covariates and conscientiousness.
Hypothesis 4: Grit will have indirect effects on all academic engagement domains via academic motivation orientations (i.e., amotivation, controlled, and autonomous motivation) even after controlling for demographic covariates and conscientiousness.

Participants

The sample was composed of 504 Filipino high school students in a private school situated in a rural area in the Philippines. Students in private secondary schools usually belong to families with medium to high socioeconomic status (SES). In terms of ethnic composition, these participants are mostly considered as Tagalogs. Secondary school students are required to attend six years of secondary education before proceeding to associate or bachelor degrees. The participants had the following profile in terms of age: M = 14.19 and SD = 1.55. There were 282 girls and 222 boys. Concerning the year level, our sample was comprised of 106 Grade 7, 93 Grade 8, 93 Grade 9, 106 Grade 10, and 106 Grade 11 students. The first author sought ethical approval from the human research ethics committee of the university prior to conducting the survey. Before survey administration, participants were requested to indicate in a consent form whether they were allowing their sons/daughters to participate in the research. Furthermore, students were asked to indicate in the consent form whether they were agreeing to join the study.

Measures

Grit

The 10-item TMGS (Datu et al., 2017b) was used to measure grit in the present study. Items were marked on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = Not like me at all; 5 = Very much like me). Here are sample items in the scale: “I am a hard worker” (perseverance of effort); “New ideas and projects distract me from previous ones” (consistency of interests) and “Changing plans or strategies is important to achieve my long-term goals in life” (adaptability to situations). To provide evidence about the psychometric validity of the TMGS in the current study, we performed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). In particular, we tested a measurement model with grit as a second-order factor accounting for all the variance and covariance in the three dimensions of grit: namely, consistency of interests (with 3 item indicators), perseverance of effort (with 3 item indicators), as well as adaptability to situations (with 4 item indicators) using the 23rd version of the Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS). Results demonstrated that the scores from the three-factor model of grit were valid: χ2 = 115.16, p < .001, comparative fit index (CFI) = .91, goodness of fit index (GFI) = .96, incremental fit index (IFI) = .91, and root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) = .072 (.058–.086). The standardized regression weight of the items in the consistency of interest dimension ranged from .37 to .66. In terms of the perseverance of effort facet, the loadings ranged from .59 to .77. Concerning the adaptability to situations dimension, the loadings ranged from .34 to .59. All the items significantly loaded on their hypothesized latent factors at p < .001. The Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient of the scale in the study was .66.

Academic motivation

We used the 22-item Academic Motivation Scale (Caleon et al., 2015) to measure amotivation, controlled, and autonomous motivational orientations. Items were rated on a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 = Very untrue of me; 7 = Very true of me). The items in each subscale asked the participants to indicate the degree to which they want to study due to the following reasons: “Honestly, I don’t know; I really feel that I am wasting my time in school” (amotivation), “Because I need at least a high school degree to find a high-paying job later on” (controlled motivation), and “Because I feel happy and satisfied while learning new things” (autonomous motivation). Result of CFA showed that the scores from the three-factor model of academic motivation with amotivation, controlled motivation, and autonomous motivation as major dimensions were valid in the present sample: χ2 = 117.12, p < .001, CFI = .95, GFI = .93, IFI = .95, and RMSEA = .09 (.08–.107). All the items significantly loaded on their hypothesized latent constructs at p < .001. The Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients for the subscales on amotivation, controlled, and autonomous motivation were .83, .80, and .89, respectively, in the study.

Academic engagement

We used the 22-item Academic Engagement Scale (Reeve & Tseng, 2011) to assess agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement. Items were rated on a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 = Strongly disagree; 7 = Strongly agree). Sample items in the subscales include: “During class, I express my preferences and opinions” (agentic engagement), “I listen carefully in class” (behavioral engagement), “When I study, I try to connect what I am learning with my own experiences” (cognitive engagement), and “I enjoy learning new things in class” (emotional engagement). Findings of CFA showed that the scores from the four-factor model of academic engagement with agentic, behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement as key facets were valid in the current sample: χ2 = 287.53, p < .001, CFI = .93, GFI = .94, IFI = .93, and RMSEA = .055 (.048, .063). All the items significantly loaded on their hypothesized latent constructs at p < .001. In this investigation, the Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients of the agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement dimensions were .73, .80, .80, and .71, respectively.

Conscientiousness

The items that were subsumed in the Conscientiousness subscale of the Ten-Item Personality Inventory (Gosling, Rentfrow, & Swann, 2003) was used to measure the extent to which the participants have exhibited this Big Five personality factor. Items were marked on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = Disagree strongly; 7 = Agree strongly). In particular, the participants were asked to indicate the degree to which they see their selves as “dependable, self-disciplined”. Consistent with the data analytic procedure to provide an estimate about this scale’s reliability in study of Datu et al. (2017b), we calculated the correlation of the two items embedded in the conscientiousness subscale of the Ten-Item Personality Inventory. The interitem correlational coefficient of the two items was r = .17, p < .001.

Preliminary, descriptive, and correlational analyses

Prior to performing descriptive, correlational, and multiple mediation analyses, we conducted missing value analysis through the 23rd version of SPSS. The percentage of missing responses ranged from 0.2% to 1.2%. Findings of Little’s missing completely at random (MCAR) test showed that the data were not missing completely at random: χ2 = 2,860.38, p < .001. Hence, we performed expectation-maximization (EM) imputation approach to supply the missing responses in the dataset. The imputed dataset was used in the subsequent analytic procedures.

Table 1 shows the results of reliability, descriptive statistical, and correlational analyses. Results showed that grit was positively correlated with conscientiousness, controlled and autonomous motivation, and all domains of academic engagement (i.e., agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement). To interpret the magnitude of correlation across studies, we referred to the recommended guidelines of Gignac and Szodorai’s (2016) who have proposed that Pearson r correlational coefficient values of r = .10, r = .20, and r = .30 indicate small, medium, and large correlations, respectively.

Multiple mediation analyses

We conducted four separate regression analyses to provide evidence about the association of grit with academic motivation and engagement dimensions after controlling for age, gender, and conscientiousness. To control for the potential influence of family-wise error due to multiple hypotheses testing in this study, we adopted the Bonferroni’s method which involves dividing the desired p value (α = .05) in detecting statistical significance by the number of hypotheses in this study. As there are four hypotheses in Study 1, we divided .05 by 4 which resulted in a new threshold of significance for identifying significant paths (p < .0125) in the regression models.

In particular, multiple mediation analyses were conducted through the INDIRECT macro (Preacher & Hayes, 2008) of SPSS. To provide evidence about the existence of indirect effects, bias-corrected bootstrapping analyses at 95% confidence interval (CI) in 5,000 bootstrapped resamples were performed. The paths of grit to the hypothesized intermediate (mediating) and outcome variables are shown in Table 2. Results corroborated H1 as grit was associated with higher levels of agentic (β = .36, t = 5.76, p < .001), behavioral (β = .53, t = 10.38, p < .001), cognitive (β = .37, t = 8.04, p < .001), and emotional engagement (β = .38, t = 7.38, p < .001) after controlling for the influence of the abovementioned covariates. H2 was fully confirmed because grit was related to higher levels of controlled motivation (β = .53, t = 6.45, p < .001) and autonomous motivation (β = .66, t = 8.52, p < .001). Supporting H3, grit was linked to low levels of amotivation (β = −.75, t = −5.44, p < .001).

To determine whether the hypothesized indirect effects were significant, we examined if zero occurs between the lower and upper limits of the confidence intervals. We found partial support for H4 because not all of the hypothesized indirect effects of grit on engagement domains via all motivational orientations were significant. Grit was related to higher levels of behavioral engagement via the intermediate variable controlled motivation. Further, the indirect effects of grit on agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement through the mediating variable autonomous motivation were significant (Table 3).

The aim of Study 1 was to assess the association of grit with different academic outcomes. Results supported most of the hypotheses in the current investigation.

Grit was associated with greater levels of agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement. These results indicate that grit may be associated with positive academic outcomes. Furthermore, the size of correlations between grit and the aforementioned academic outcomes ranged from r = .29 to r = .52 which indicated medium to large effect sizes based on the criteria of Gignac and Szodorai (2016).

Overall, the indirect effects of grit on self-reported behavioral engagement via the intermediate variable, controlled motivation, were significant. The indirect influences of grit on all engagement domains (i.e., agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional) through autonomous motivation were also significant. These results imply that academic motivation may serve as a concrete psychological mechanism through which the TMG may be associated with higher levels of perceived academic engagement.

The aim of Study 2 was to examine the association of grit with subjective well-being dimensions (i.e., life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect), interdependent happiness, and psychological distress even after controlling for age, gender, and neuroticism among Filipino secondary school students.

The following hypotheses were posited:
Hypothesis 5: Grit will be positively associated with life satisfaction and positive affect after controlling for demographic covariates and Neuroticism.
Hypothesis 6: Grit will be negatively correlated with negative affect after controlling for demographic covariates and Neuroticism.
Hypothesis 7: Grit will be positively associated with interdependent happiness after controlling for demographic covariates and Neuroticism.
Hypothesis 8: Grit will be negatively correlated with psychological distress after controlling for demographic covariates and Neuroticism.

Participants

The sample was comprised of 356 Filipino secondary school students in a government-funded secondary school located in an urban area in the Philippines. In this school, students typically belong to the Tagalog ethnic group. Students in government-funded schools commonly come from families with low SES. These students were recruited via convenience sampling since the participants’ availability during the time of data collection served as our main consideration in choosing them. In terms of age, the participants had the following profile: M = 14.36, SD = 1.29. There were 239 girls and 116 boys while one failed to indicate gender. Concerning the level, the participants involved 70 Grade 7, 88 Grade 8, 118 Grade 9, and 75 Grade 10 students. However, five participants failed to specify their year level. Before taking the survey, participants were requested to return the consent forms which indicated whether they wanted to join the investigation. Furthermore, parents were also requested to consent to their son’s/daughter’s participation in the study through a passive consent form.

Measures

Grit

Similar to Study 1, the 10-item TMGS was used to assess the participants’ perseverance, passion, and adaptability for long-term goals. We also conducted second-order CFA, in which grit served as a second factor explaining all the variance and covariance in consistency (with 3 item indicators), perseverance (with 3 item indicators), and adaptability (with 4 item indicators), using AMOS (Version 23) to examine whether the scores on this three-factor model of grit would be valid in the current sample. Findings of CFA demonstrated that the scores from the TMG with consistency, perseverance, and adaptability as major dimensions were valid: χ2 = 90.46, p < .001, CFI = .90, GFI = .95, IFI = .90, and RMSEA = .068 (.051 - .086). The standardized factor loading of the items embedded in the perseverance of effort facet ranged from .52 to .60. In terms of the consistency of interest dimension, the loadings ranged from .25 to .39. The items in the adaptability to situations facet ranged from .46 to .66. All the items significantly loaded on their hypothesized latent constructs at p < .001. The Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient of the scale in the present investigation was .70.

Interdependent happiness

The nine-item Interdependent Happiness Scale (Hitokoto & Uchida, 2015) was used to measure the degree to which the participants exhibited an interpersonal construal of happiness. Items were marked on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = Strongly disagree; 5 = Strongly agree). A sample item in the scale includes: “I believe that I and those around me (i.e., my family, friends, and classmates) are happy.” High scores in the scale would indicate high levels of interdependent happiness. The finding of second-order CFA revealed that the scores from the higher-order interdependent happiness latent construct with quiescence, ordinariness, and relationship harmony as first-order factors were valid in the present sample: χ2 = 66.09, p = .12, CFI = .94, GFI = .96, IFI = .94, and RMSEA = .07 (.050, .091). The Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient of the scale in the present investigation was .79.

Psychological health

To measure the perceived psychological health of the participants, the 12-item General Health Questionnaire–12 (Goldberg & Williams, 1988) was used in the study. Items were marked on a 4-point Likert scale (0 = Never; 3 = All the time). A sample item in the scale includes: “Have you felt constantly under strain.” Result of second-order CFA showed that the scores from the higher-order psychological health construct with positive items and negative items as first-order factors, were valid in the current sample: χ2 = 66.09, p = .12, CFI = .94, GFI = .96, IFI = .94, and RMSEA = .07 (.050, .091). The Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient of the scale was .63.

Subjective well-being

The nine-item Concise Measure of Subjective Well-Being (Suh & Koo, 2011) was used to measure the participants’ degree of life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect. Items were rated on a 7-point Likert-type scale for life satisfaction (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree) and for positive and negative affect (1 = never; 7 = always). Sample items in the scale include: (for life satisfaction) “I am satisfied with the relational aspects of my life (e.g., relationship to family and friends).” This instruction was used to assess positive and negative affect: “Please think about the events and thoughts you had in the past month, and rate how frequently you have experienced each of the following emotions during this period.” The sample emotions for these subscales include: (for positive affect) = “happy”; and (for negative affect) “irritated.” Results of CFA demonstrated that the scores from the three-factor model of subjective well-being with life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect as major dimensions were valid in the present sample: χ2 = 86.40, p < .001, CFI = .90, GFI = .95, IFI = .90, and RMSEA = .068 (.050, .085). The Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients for life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect domains were .76, .77, and .60, respectively.

Neuroticism

We used the two items in the Neuroticism subscale of the Ten-Item Personality Inventory (Gosling et al., 2003) to measure the Big Five personality traits. Items were marked on a 7-point Likert rating scale (1 = Disagree strongly; 7 = Agree strongly). The items asked the participants to rate the extent to which they see their selves as “anxious, easily upset.” The interitem correlation coefficient of these two items was .35.

Preliminary, descriptive, and correlational analyses

Before conducting hierarchical regression analyses, we performed missing value analysis because the pattern of missing responses ranged from 0.3% to 2.5%. Little’s MCAR test showed that these responses were not MCAR, χ2 = 2,173.40, p = .03. Then, we conducted the EM approach and used the imputed dataset in the subsequent analyses.

The results of descriptive statistical and correlational analyses are shown in Table 4. Findings of correlational analyses demonstrated that grit was positively associated with life satisfaction, positive affect, and interdependent happiness. Grit was marginally and negatively linked to neuroticism. Life satisfaction was positively related to positive affect and interdependent happiness while positive affect was positively correlated with interdependent happiness. As expected, neuroticism was negatively correlated with life satisfaction, positive affect, and interdependent happiness. Neuroticism was positively associated with negative affect. All these analyses were carried out using SPSS (Version 23).

Hierarchical regression analyses

The results of hierarchical regression analyses are shown in Table 5. In Step 1, age, gender, and neuroticism were entered as predictor variables. We controlled for the possible effects of neuroticism because previous literature has demonstrated that among the Big Five personality factors, neuroticism served as the strongest predictor of well-being outcomes like happiness and life satisfaction (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998). In Step 2, grit was entered as a predictor variable of the outcome variables (i.e., life satisfaction, positive affect, negative affect, psychological distress, and interdependent happiness). Coefficients of determination (R2) were also reported as a measure of effect size in the study. These analyses were performed via SPSS. In evaluating the statistical significance of the hypothesized paths among predictor and outcome variables, we relied on the Bonferroni adjusted level of significance value (p < .0125).

H5 and H7 were supported as grit positively predicted life satisfaction (β = .81, t = 7.06, p < .001), positive affect (β = .29, t = 2.64, p < .01), and interdependent happiness (β = .25, t = 4.04, p < .001) even after controlling for demographic covariates and neuroticism. Result also corroborated H8 because grit negatively predicted psychological distress (β = −.15, t = −3.19, p < .01) after controlling for the potential influence of the aforementioned covariates. H6 was not supported as grit did not predict negative affect.

The objective of Study 2 was to examine the association of grit with well-being indices. Our results generally corroborated our hypotheses as grit was associated with high levels of optimal psychological health.

Consistent with H5, our results demonstrated that grit was associated with higher levels of life satisfaction and positive affect. Yet, grit was not related to negative affect which did not support H6. These findings indicate that grit may be linked to positive dimensions of subjective well-being.

Supporting H7, grit was related to higher levels of interdependent happiness. This implies that students with passion, perseverance, and adaptability for long-term goals are likely to espouse a socially oriented definition of happiness. H8 was also confirmed because grit was linked to low levels of psychological distress. Moreover, the correlational coefficients between grit and well-being indices ranged from r = .03 to r = .36, which are considered small to large in magnitude based on Gignac and Szodorai’s (2016) recommended guidelines. In particular, grit had the strongest degree of association with life satisfaction (r = .36, p < .001), which can be interpreted as a large effect size. The relationships of grit to interdependent happiness (r = .23, p < .001), can be categorized as approaching medium (r = .25) effects. Furthermore, the associations of grit with psychological distress (r = −.17, p < .001), positive affect (r = .16, p < .001), and negative affect (r = .03, p = .61) can be interpreted as small effect sizes.

The overarching aim of the present research was to examine the association of grit with positive educational and well-being outcomes. Our results generally demonstrated that the TMG may be linked to higher levels of perceived academic motivation, engagement, and well-being among Filipino secondary school students.

Study 1 showed that grit was associated with perceived academic engagement, and motivation (both controlled and autonomous) even after controlling for relevant demographic covariates and conscientiousness. Our findings suggest that students with high levels of perseverance, passion, and adaptability for long-term goals are more likely to report a greater degree of perceived academic engagement. These results corroborated existing literature regarding the advantageous impact of grit on educational outcomes such as academic achievement (Bowman et al., 2015; Duckworth et al., 2007; Li et al., 2016), motivation (Eskreis-Winkler et al., 2014), and engagement (Datu, Valdez, & King, 2016).

Our research has contributed in two important ways to the knowledge base on grit and academic outcomes. First, whereas previous studies have explored the consequences of grit on academic outcomes based on the original two-factor model of grit (Duckworth et al., 2007), our investigation demonstrated that grit was associated with academic motivation and engagement based on the TMG (Datu et al., 2017a, 2017b), after controlling for conscientiousness. Second, our research offered preliminary evidence regarding the indirect effects of grit on perceived academic engagement via autonomous motivation. To the best of our knowledge, this was the first investigation which demonstrated that autonomous motivation can serve as a concrete psychological mechanism through which grit may be linked to agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement.

It was also found that grit was associated with higher levels of controlled motivation. This result supported the existing literature regarding the positive correlation between positive noncognitive traits and motivational outcomes. Previous studies have shown that positive psychological traits and states like psychological capital (Datu, King, & Valdez, 2016), peace of mind (Datu, 2017), and gratitude (Valdez, Yang, & Datu, 2017) were linked to higher levels of controlled motivation in an interdependent context. A potential reason that could account for the positive association of grit with extrinsic motivation points to the adaptive role of extrinsic types of academic motivation in collectivist contexts (Datu, 2017).

Furthermore, Study 1 showed that among the three motivational orientations (i.e., amotivation, controlled motivation, and autonomous motivation), only the autonomous motivation positively predicted agentic, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement. These findings suggest that espousing intrinsic forms of academic motivation may be linked to elevated levels of involvement in a wide range of school-related activities. Our findings corroborated the existing literature regarding the beneficial role of intrinsic motivation on optimal academic outcomes (Guay et al., 2010; Jang et al., 2012).

Study 2 demonstrated that grit was related to higher levels of well-being outcomes. In particular, the results imply that “gritty” students are likely to report greater degrees of life satisfaction, positive emotions, and interdependent happiness. Students who reported higher levels of grittiness are also less likely to experience different symptoms of psychological distress (e.g., anxiety, depression, and loss of confidence). These findings were consistent with the extant literature regarding the association of grit with well-being and positive psychological outcomes like subjective well-being (Datu, Valdez, & King, 2016; Jin & Kim, 2017; Singh & Jha, 2008), psychological well-being (Vainio & Daukantaitė, 2016), school satisfaction (Ivcevic & Brackett, 2014), and reduction in suicidal thinking (Kleiman, Adams, Kashdan, & Riskind, 2013). Yet, unlike these studies, this research explored how grit is linked to interdependent happiness and psychological distress, which provided new insights regarding the nomological network of grit in the educational contexts.

Taken together, the findings from this research indicate that grit may be associated with higher levels of adaptive academic motivation, academic engagement, and well-being, which provided some support on the major tenets of the engine model of well-being (Jayawickreme et al., 2012). In particular, these findings suggest that the TMG can operate as an input variable that may be linked to various outcome variables (i.e., academic engagement) through the process variable academic motivation. Grit also functions as an input variable that may be related to different well-being outcomes (i.e., interdependent happiness, positive affect, life satisfaction, and negative affect).

This study has some limitations. Cross-sectional design was used in both studies, which prevents deducing any direct causal link between grit and positive student outcomes. Future research can address this issue by conducting experimental and intervention research designs to provide evidence of the effects of grit on adaptive academic and well-being indices. The use of longitudinal design may also be a promising direction to demonstrate the mediating role of motivation on the link between grit and academic outcomes.

This investigation relied on self-reported measures of grit, academic engagement, and well-being. This may be susceptible to personal bias and the common desire to present one’s self in the most positive light. This methodological limitation could be addressed by utilizing objective indicators of school success (e.g., actual grade point average from school records, direct observation of students at work, and peer report of the student’s academic engagement). For additional data on a student’s psychological health, information could be obtained from the school counselor or school psychologists. Furthermore, the relatively low Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the TMGS in Study 1 served as another limitation of this investigation. This research also relied on assessing the association of grit with adaptive outcomes among homogenous samples of Tagalog students in a rural and an urban context. In future investigations, researchers are encouraged to examine the relationship of grit to academic functioning and psychological health using a heterogenous sample of students from various ethnic backgrounds to strengthen the generalizability of the findings. Future research can also consider collecting objective data on students’ physical health, such as actual number of medical consultations due to diseases or illnesses or dental visits, to provide stronger evidence about the potential link of grit to physical well-being.

The results suggest a number of implications for theory. As regards theory, our research extended the line of evidence about the academic correlates of grit by demonstrating that a three-factor model of grit may be linked to higher levels of perceived academic motivation and engagement. Moreover, study suggests that autonomous motivation could serve as a psychological mechanism that may elucidate why grit can lead to greater levels of perceived active involvement in school-related activities. To our knowledge, this was the first investigation that showed the indirect effect of grit on academic engagement via academic motivation, and that grit could predict higher interdependent happiness and psychological distress.

Our research has practical implications arising from the study; due to the fact that “grittiness” is associated with both positive educational and well-being outcomes, teachers, school psychologists, guidance counselors, and other mental health professionals are recommended to develop interventions that can boost students’ passion, perseverance, and adaptability for facing academic and nonacademic challenges. School psychologists can also work with curriculum leaders and teachers in building a curriculum which will integrate concrete strategies to promote grittiness among high school students. Indeed, the findings point to the potential benefits of cultivating student’s grittiness to boost academic success and well-being.

The literature has shown that grit can predict a wide array of positive educational outcomes and well-being, not only in Western settings but also in collectivist contexts. Clearly, a disposition to exhibit passion, perseverance, and adaptability for long-term aspirations can serve as an engine for academic engagement and optimal psychological health. The present research demonstrates that the TMG is associated with perceived academic motivation, engagement, and well-being outcomes among Filipino high school students.

Bowman, N. A., Hill, P. L., Denson, N., & Bronkema, R. (2015). Keep on truckin’ or stay the course? Exploring grit dimensions as differential predictors of educational achievement, satisfaction, and intentions. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6, 639–645. 10.1177/1948550615574300

Caleon, I. S., Wui, M. G. L., Tan, J. P., Chiam, C. L., Soon, T. C., & King, R. B. (2015). Cross-cultural validation of the Academic Motivation Scale: A Singapore investigation. Child Indicators Research, 8, 925–942. 10.1007/s12187-014-9298-7

Credé, M., Tynan, M. C., & Harms, P. D. (2017). Much ado about grit: A meta-analytic synthesis of the grit literature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 492–511.

Datu, J. A. D. (2015). Validating the revised self-construal scale in the Philippines. Current Psychology, 34, 626–633. 10.1007/s12144-014-9275-9

Datu, J. A. D. (2017). Peace of mind, academic motivation, and academic achievement in Filipino high school students. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 20, E22. 10.1017/sjp.2017.19

Datu, J. A. D., King, R. B., & Valdez, J. P. M. (2016). Psychological capital bolsters motivation, engagement, and achievement: Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. The Journal of Positive Psychology. Advance online publication. 10.1080/17439760.2016.1257056

Datu, J. A. D., Valdez, J. P. M., & King, R. B. (2016). Perseverance counts but consistency does not! Validating the Short-Grit Scale in a collectivist setting. Current Psychology, 35, 121–130. 10.1007/s12144-015-9374-2

Datu, J. A. D., Yuen, M., & Chen, G. (2016). Exploring determination for long-term goals in a collectivist context: A qualitative study. Current Psychology. Advance online publication. 10.1007/s12144-016-9509-0

Datu, J. A. D., Yuen, M., & Chen, G. (2017a). Grit and determination: A review of literature with implications for theory and research. Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools, 27, 168–176. 10.1017/jgc.2016.2

Datu, J. A. D., Yuen, M., & Chen, G. (2017b). Development and validation of the Triarchic Model of Grit Scale (TMGS): Evidence from Filipino undergraduate students. Personality and Individual Differences, 114, 198–205. 10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.012

DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229. 10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.197

Dotterer, A. M., & Lowe, K. (2011). Classroom context, school engagement, and academic achievement in early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 1649–1660. 10.1007/s10964-011-9647-5

Duckworth, A. L., Kirby, T. A., Tsukayama, E., Berstein, H., & Ericsson, K. A. (2011). Deliberate practice spells success: Why grittier competitors triumph at the National Spelling Bee. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 174–181. 10.1177/1948550610385872

Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1087–1101. 10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087

Duckworth, A. L., & Quinn, P. D. (2009). Development and validation of the short grit scale (grit-s). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 166–174. 10.1080/00223890802634290

Eskreis-Winkler, L., Shulman, E. P., Beal, S. A., & Duckworth, A. L. (2014). The grit effect: Predicting retention in the military, the workplace, school and marriage. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 36. 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00036

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–109. 10.3102/00346543074001059

Gignac, G. E., & Szodorai, E. (2016). Effect size guidelines for individual differences researchers. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 74–78. 10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.069

Goldberg, D., & Williams, P. (1988). A user’s guide to the General Heath Questionnaire. Windsor, UK: NFER-Nelson.

Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504–528. 10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1

Graetz, B. (1991). Multidimensional properties of the General Health Questionnaire. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 26, 132–138. 10.1007/BF00782952

Guay, F., Ratelle, C. F., Roy, A., & Litalien, D. (2010). Academic self-concept, autonomous academic motivation, and academic achievement: Mediating and additive effects. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 644–653. 10.1016/j.lindif.2010.08.001

Hitokoto, H., & Uchida, Y. (2015). Interdependent happiness: Theoretical importance and measurement validity. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16, 211–239. 10.1007/s10902-014-9505-8

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ivcevic, Z., & Brackett, M. (2014). Predicting school success: Comparing conscientiousness, grit, and emotion regulation ability. Journal of Research in Personality, 52, 29–36. 10.1016/j.jrp.2014.06.005

Jang, H., Kim, E. J., & Reeve, J. (2012). Longitudinal test of self-determination theory’s motivation mediation model in a naturally-occurring classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 1175–1188. 10.1037/a0028089

Jayawickreme, E., Forgeard, M., & Seligman, M. (2012). The engine of well-being. Review of General Psychology, 16, 327–342. 10.1037/a0027990

Jin, B., & Kim, J. (2017). Grit, basic needs satisfaction, and subjective well-being. Journal of Individual Differences, 38, 29–35. 10.1027/1614-0001/a000219

Kleiman, E. M., Adams, L. M., Kashdan, T. B., & Riskind, J. H. (2013). Gratitude and grit indirectly reduce risk of suicidal ideations by enhancing meaning in life: Evidence for a mediated moderation model. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 539–546. 10.1016/j.jrp.2013.04.007

Li, J., Zhao, Y., Kong, F., Du, S., Yang, S., & Wang, S. (2016). Psychometric assessment of the short grit scale among Chinese adolescents. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. Advance online publication. 10.1177/0734282916674858

Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253. 10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879

Reeve, J., & Tseng, C.-M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 257–267. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002

Rimfeld, K., Kovas, Y., Dale, P. S., & Plomin, R. (2016). True grit and genetics: Predicting academic achievement from personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111, 780–789. 10.1037/pspp0000089

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Schmidt, F. T. C., Fleckenstein, J., Retelsdorf, J., Eskreis-Winkler, L., & Möller, J. (2017). Measuring grit. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. Advance online publication. 10.1027/1015-5759/a000407

Shahar, G., Henrich, C. C., Blatt, S. J., Ryan, R., & Little, T. D. (2003). Interpersonal relatedness, self-definition, and their motivational orientation during adolescence: A theoretical and empirical integration. Developmental Psychology, 39, 470–483. 10.1037/0012-1649.39.3.470

Singh, K., & Jha, S. D. (2008). Positive affect and negative affect, and grit as predictors of happiness and life satisfaction. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 34, 40–45.

Suh, E. M. (2007). Downsides of an overly context-sensitive self: Implications from the culture and subjective well-being research. Journal of Personality, 75, 1321–1343. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00477.x

Suh, E. M., & Koo, J. (2011). A concise measure of subjective well-being (COMOSWB): Scale development and validation. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 25, 96–114.

Uchida, Y., & Ogihara, Y. (2012). Personal or interpersonal construal of happiness: A cultural psychological perspective. International Journal of Wellbeing, 2, 354–369. 10.5502/ijw.v2.i4.5

Vainio, M. M., & Daukantaitė, D. (2016). Grit and different aspects of well-being: Direct and indirect relationships via sense of coherence and authenticity. Journal of Happiness Studies, 17, 2119–2147. 10.1007/s10902-015-9688-7

Valdez, J. P. M., Yang, W., & Datu, J. A. D. (2017). Validation of the Gratitude Questionnaire in Filipino secondary school students. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 20, E45. 10.1017/sjp.2017.51

Vignoles, V. L., Owe, E., Becker, M., Smith, P. B., Easterbrook, M. J., Brown, R., . . .Bond, M. H. (2016). Beyond the ‘east-west’ dichotomy: Global variation in cultural models of selfhood. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145, 966–1000. 10.1037/xge0000175

Wolters, C. A., & Hussain, M. (2015). Investigating grit and its relations with college students’ self-regulated learning and academic achievement. Metacognition and Learning, 10, 293–311. 10.1007/s11409-014-9128-9

Submitted: August 14, 2017 Revised: October 9, 2017 Accepted: October 12, 2017