The purpose of this thesis was to examine the effects of occupational therapy rehabilitation on geriatric patients by reviewing studies conducted on motivation in occupational therapy. In occupational therapy it is important that you set goals for your patients (Creek & Lougher, 2008). It is also important to understand what motivates a patient to achieve those goals because goals and valued activities are intimately connected to motivation. Motivation deals with why we perform certain behaviors. It can predict physical performance and how well a person might recover from an illness and has been suggested to be predictive for rehabilitation success (Carlson, 1997). Because the geriatric population has more longevity, it is important to ensure that they receive the appropriate care necessary to improve and maintain their quality of life (Mason, 1994). After reviewing multiple studies the results reinforced the importance of motivation in occupational therapy treatment. Self-efficacy was found to highly influence a person’s motivation and was a recurring theme throughout this review (Peralta-Catipon & Hwang, 2011). One key to understanding and studying motivation in older adults was to identify what occupations matter to them (Teitelman, Raber, & Watts, 2010). It is important that occupational therapists understand how occupations become meaningful for the geriatric population as participation in those occupations plays an important role in promoting productive aging. When the occupational therapist was able to understand how occupations became meaningful to the patient, they were more equipped to help motivate the patient to participate in their rehabilitation (Janssen & Stube, 2013).

Notwithstanding the negative influence of demotivation on student learning outcomes, prior research in EFL demotivation suffers from the lack of generally agreed-upon conceptual understanding, which hampers scale development. The present series of studies sought to explore the ideas of demotivation and describe the development of the Learner Perception of Demotivators Scale (LPDS) both conceptually and psychometrically. In Study 1 (N = 295), an exploratory factor analysis offered preliminary support for a factor structure comprising three dimensions: negative teacher behavior, loss of task value, and low expectancy for success. In Study 2 (N = 320), the proposed factor structure was further corroborated through confirmatory factor analysis, and its validity was documented by means of correlating with academic performance, self-efficacy, and mindset. A second-order factor model was tested to investigate whether a set of demotivating factors load on an overall construct that may be termed “Demotivator”. Whereas the model fit confirmed a wellitting second-order model with post hoc model adjustment, one low first-order loading (negative teacher behavior) does not seem to support “Demotivator” as a higher order construct comprising three subdimensions. Furthermore, the LPDS demonstrated evidence of configural, metric, scalar, and residual invariance across gender, suggesting the same underlying construct is measured across gender groups. Contrary to the findings in motivation research, loss of task value was a stronger predictor of performance than low expectancy for success. Further, in Study 3 (N =320), loss of task value distinguished extremely motivated EFL learners from ordinary ones, offering tentative evidence for the reason behind demotivation in EFL learning. The unique role of task value found in Study 2 and Study 3 gave insights into the hypothetical construct of “demotivation”. It was also examined in the context of East Asian culture. By establishing a nomological network (academic performance, self-efficacy, and mindset), the current study provided a lawful pattern of interrelationships that exists between the hypothetical construct (demotivation) and observable attributes (e.g., academic performance) and that guides researcher for future L2 studies. More implications and limitations for future studies are discussed.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.