Marble statue in the desert: how teachers’ curiosity differentially inspire students’ intentional self-regulation

This Excel file contains the de-identified data underpinning the article “Marble statue in the desert: how teachers’ curiosity differentially inspire students’ intentional self-regulation”. The research tested the hypothesis that teachers’ interest-type epistemic curiosity (I-type) is linked to more autonomy-supportive teaching, which promotes students’ promotion focus and growth-oriented intentional self-regulation, whereas deprivation-type curiosity (D-type) is linked to more structure-providing teaching, which relates to students’ prevention focus and protective strategies. We also expected an autonomy-supportive leadership climate to strengthen these pathways. The first sheet (research1) includes Study 1 survey data from in-service teachers. Each row represents one teacher and includes demographic variables (e.g., gender, age, work context) and scale scores for I-type curiosity (IC), D-type curiosity (DC), autonomy support (TAS), structure (TS) and perceived leadership autonomy-supportive climate (LAS). All psychological variables are mean scores of multi-item measures rated on 6-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree, 6 = strongly agree). The second sheet (research2) includes Study 2 data from students nested within teachers. Each row represents one student, with teacher-level variables (teacher ID, curiosity, leadership climate, autonomy support, structure) repeated for that teacher, and student-level variables including gender, age, perceived autonomy support (SAS), structure (SS), promotion and prevention regulatory focus (PRO, PRE), and intentional self-regulation strategies (elective selection, loss-based selection, optimization, compensation, plus a composite ISR score). Higher scores indicate stronger endorsement of each construct. Analyses reported in the article show that higher teacher I-type curiosity is associated with more autonomy support and, in turn, with students’ promotion focus and growth-oriented self-regulation, whereas higher D-type curiosity is associated with more structure and with students’ prevention focus and protective strategies. Users can reproduce these findings or test alternative models. When analysing research2, student rows are clustered within teachers (T_ID), so multilevel or clustered methods are recommended.本Excel文件包含支撑论文《沙漠中的大理石雕像：教师好奇心如何差异化激发学生的有意自我调节》的去标识化数据。本研究验证了如下假说：教师的兴趣型认知好奇心（I-type epistemic curiosity）与更具自主性支持的教学行为正相关，进而促进学生的晋升定向与成长导向的有意自我调节；而剥夺型认知好奇心（D-type epistemic curiosity）则与更强调结构提供的教学行为相关，进而关联学生的防御定向与保护性策略。此外，本研究还预期，自主性支持型领导氛围能够强化上述作用路径。 首个工作表（research1）包含来自在职教师的研究1调查数据。每一行对应一位教师，包含人口统计学变量（如性别、年龄、工作情境）以及兴趣型认知好奇心（I-type curiosity, IC）、剥夺型认知好奇心（D-type curiosity, DC）、自主性支持（autonomy support, TAS）、结构提供（structure, TS）与感知到的领导自主性支持氛围（perceived leadership autonomy-supportive climate, LAS）的量表得分。所有心理变量均为多题项测量的平均得分，采用6点李克特量表计分（1=完全不同意，6=完全同意）。 第二个工作表（research2）包含嵌套于教师群体中的学生的研究2数据。每一行对应一位学生，其中教师层面变量（教师ID、好奇心、领导氛围、自主性支持、结构提供）会重复出现在该教师对应的所有学生行中，同时包含学生层面变量：性别、年龄、感知到的自主性支持（perceived autonomy support, SAS）、结构提供（structure, SS）、晋升与防御调节定向（promotion and prevention regulatory focus, PRO、PRE），以及有意自我调节策略（选择性选择、损失导向选择、优化、补偿，外加综合有意自我调节得分ISR）。得分越高，代表对各构念的认同程度越强。 本论文中报告的分析结果显示，教师的兴趣型认知好奇心越高，其提供的自主性支持越多，进而与学生的晋升定向及成长导向的自我调节正相关；而教师的剥夺型认知好奇心越高，则越倾向于采用结构提供型教学，且与学生的防御定向及保护性策略正相关。使用者可复现上述研究发现，或检验其他理论模型。在分析研究2的数据时，学生行嵌套于教师群体（T_ID）中，因此推荐采用多层级或聚类分析方法。