{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03695491500369549, 'fraction_numerical': 0.022172949002217297, 'mean_word_length': 4.991150442477876, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Need for achievement influences test-taking motivation influences achievement test performance

In this study the influence of the general need for achievement on the situational test taking motivation and on an intelligence test performance was examined. 337 pupils (9th and 10th grade of all German school types) performed three questionnaires (RLMI-KJ, Lukesch, in prep.; AMG-S K-J, Schmalt, 2005; and a self-constructed questionnaire for test taking motivation, TTM) and the Leistungsprufsystem 2, (LPS-2, Kreuzpointner, 2010), a German intelligence and performance test. Statistically significant bivariate correlations between the motivational variables and the test performance were only found for the fear of failure active (.17) and passive (.21) and the TTM measured after the test execution (.18). A SEM was used to show to what extend the TTM depends on the need for achievement and to what extent both variables influence the performance test result. As expected, there is a statistically significant path coefficient for the influence of the need for achievement on the TTM (.56). The path coefficient for the influence of the TTM on the performance test achievement was rather unexpected in its extent (.29). Cronbach (1960) seems to be right when he writes: Test performance in a given test is a joint function of ability and motivation.