Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 57 HOW DO EPISTEMOLOGICAL BELIEFS AFFECT TRAINING MOTIVATION? Ingrid Molan Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana Aškerčeva 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia ingridmolan@gmail.com Eva Boštjančič Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana Aškerčeva 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia eva.bostjancic@ff.uni-lj.si Abstract Studies show that human resources development through workplace training is one of the major investments in the workforce in today’s globalized and challenging market. As training motivation influences employees’ preparation for the workplace training, their respond to the programme, their learning outcome, their performance levels, and use of acquired knowledge and skills in their workplace it seems logical to investigate and determine antecedents of training motivation. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between the concepts of epistemological beliefs, training motivation and the actual participation in the workplace training. We predicted that epistemological beliefs would have an effect on training motivation and actual participation on the workplace training and that there would be a positive relationship between the concepts, meaning that the more sophisticated epistemological beliefs would lead to higher motivation and participation. To test the epistemological beliefs, the Epistemic Belief Inventory (Schraw, Bendixen & Dunkle, 2002) was used and adjusted to the workplace setting. Then the results were compared to em- ployees’ training motivation, which was measured with a questionnaire made by authors of the present study, and employees’ actual number of training hours annually. The results confirmed the relationship between the concepts as well as a significant predicting value of epistemological beliefs on motivation and actual participation. Epistemic Belief Inventory did not yield expected results reported by the authors of the instrument therefore the limitations, possible other interpretations and suggested further exploration are discussed. Keywords: epistemological beliefs, motivation, workplace training 1. INTRODUCTION In today’s economically challenging world of globalization it is crucial for employers to invest in their workforce in order to stay competitive (Ouelett, 2012). Workplace training is one of the possibilities to promote human resources develop- ment and studies show that employees’ training has a direct positive effect on organizations’ perform- ance and sustainable development (Ji, Huang, Liu, Zhu, & Cai, 2012). There are many factors that may influence the actual participation in the training; one of those is employees’ training motivation. Many studies have shown (review in Abdul Aziz & Ahmad, 2011) that motivation is a key factor for training effectiveness. If the internal and external antecedents of employees’ motivation for the work- place training were known, HR departments or em- ployers could have some control over how to motivate workers to engage themselves in the work- place training and become a skilful workforce. Vol. 3, No. 1, 57-68 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 Ingrid Molan, Eva Boštjančič: How do Epistemological Beliefs Affect Training Motivation? 58 There are many motivational theories trying to explain the concept in general. Those might clarify the principles behind employees’ motivation for the workplace training. However, the focus in this paper will be on relation between motivation and episte- mological beliefs where we will investigate whether epistemological beliefs could predict motivation and actual participation in workplace training. Epistemological beliefs have been a topic of re- search for the past 60 years especially in a school environment where researchers tried to uncover the principles of people’s core assumptions about knowledge and learning and, primarily, their effect on actual learning and academic achievement. This study, however, focuses on adult employees and workplace setting in Slovenia. 1.1 Epistemological Beliefs Epistemology is an area of philosophy that dis- cusses the nature of human knowledge. Epistemo- logical beliefs1, therefore, question particular issues such as how individuals gain knowledge, their the- ories and beliefs about knowing and the influence their beliefs have on cognitive processes (Hofer & Pintrich, 1997). Many studies have been investigat- ing epistemological beliefs (review in Hofer & Pin- trich, 1997) since 1950s; however, it is difficult to find an agreement on the actual construct of epis- temological beliefs, its dimensions and connectivity to other constructs in cognition and motivation. The majority of research has focused on students and school environment where Perry (Hofer & Pintrich, 1997) was the first to suggest that students make the meaning of their educational experience as an evolving developmental process rather than reflection of per- sonality. Perry’s seminal work focused on development of epistemological beliefs in students. He stated nine positions that were clustered into four categories: du- alism, multiplicity, relativism, and commitment within relativism (review in Hofer & Pintrich, 1997). Inconsistencies in results of many studies that followed Perry’s work let Schommer (1990) to pro- pose that personal epistemology is a belief system that is multidimensional rather than one-dimen- sional following certain stages. She developed a questionnaire that yielded four factors: fixed ability, quick learning, simple knowledge, and certain knowledge (this is a naïve perspective; however, all dimensions are viewed as a continuum). Schommer reported that all of the factors could have been de- rived from other authors’ work and thus seemed plausible. She failed to identify the fifth belief (om- niscient authority) which was theorized by other re- searchers having found the relationship between authority and skilled reasoning (review in Schraw et al., 2002). The five distinct beliefs are thus beliefs about fixed ability to gain knowledge (vs. acquired ability), simple knowledge (vs. complex knowledge), certain knowledge (vs. tentative), quick learning (vs. gradual acquisition), and source of knowledge (au- thority vs. observation). Those dimensions repre- sent more or less independent beliefs which means that an individual could be sophisticated2 in some beliefs but not necessarily in others as well. There is still an ongoing debate whether the structure of epistemological belief system truly consists of five dimensions as some studies show inconsistent find- ings (Hofer & Pintrich, 1997). In her several studies about epistemological be- liefs Schommer (Hofer & Pintrich, 1997) concluded that students from junior college to university change their beliefs about knowledge (this is congruent with Perry’s principles of development or change of epis- temological beliefs). University students are more likely to believe in fixed ability, whereas junior college students tend to believe in simple knowledge, certain knowledge and quick learning (Schommer, 1993). Schommer, Calvert, Gariglietti, & Bajaj (1997) found in their study that beliefs change from the freshman to the senior year in a way that simple knowledge, certain knowledge and quick learning decrease. Cano 1 In the present study, the notion “epistemological beliefs” will refer to individuals’ beliefs about the nature of knowl- edge and knowing (Hofer & Pintrich, 1997). Beliefs refer to the state in which an individual holds an assumption of something being true (Schwitzgebel, 2010). 2 A term sophisticated beliefs (as opposed to naïve beliefs) in used in personal epistemology for describing beliefs in knowledge and knowing that go beyond perceiving knowledge as absolute and transferable and rather compre- hending it as a complex concept with multiple perspectives (Brownlee, Nailon & Tickle, 2010). Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 59 (2005) reported that epistemological beliefs become more realistic and complex throughout secondary education. Schommer (1990) found that older stu- dents were more likely to believe that the ability to learn is acquired (dimension “control of knowledge”). Education and parents’ demands influence students’ complexity of their epistemological beliefs in a way that the higher education and the higher expecta- tions parents have to their children, the more likely they are to develop sophisticated epistemological be- lief system. A significant relationship between epistemolog- ical beliefs and learning outcomes (Cano, 2005), learning goals (Cavallo, Rozman, Blickenstaff, & Walker, 2003), and comprehension and interpreta- tion of information (Schommer, 1990), where stu- dents with more sophisticated beliefs tend to be more successful that their peers with less sophisti- cated beliefs, was reported. Boden (2005) found that epistemological beliefs correlate to university students’ perception of readiness for self-directed learning; they are more open to learning opportu- nities. Bath & Smith (2009) reported that epistemo- logical beliefs predict lifelong learning3. Their study showed that students with more sophisticated be- liefs and openness to intellectual experiences focus on understanding and comprehension of meaning, relation of ideas and use of evidence and logic as well as, compared to their peers, are more likely to be lifelong learners. From their results, Bath & Smith conclude that it is important to develop more so- phisticated beliefs in students, should the desired outcome of the education be creating a lifelong learner. Bauer, Festner, Gruber, Harteis, & Heid (2004) argue that there are at least two reasons why epis- temological beliefs are relevant for workplace learn- ing4. They hinder or foster the seeking for workplace learning opportunities and influence the appraisal of workplace being seen as a learning environment or not. People whose epistemological beliefs are less so- phisticated are less likely to perceive the workplace as a learning environment (Bauer et al., 2004). 1.2 Training Motivation Training motivation5 defined as “direction, in- tensity and persistence of learning directed behav- iour in training context” (Colquitt, LePine & Noe, 2000, p. 678) is one of the most important factors that influences employees’ respond to a training programme (Facteau et al., 1995). Many studies have shown that employees’ level of training motivation influences their preparation for the workplace training6, their respond to the pro- gramme, their learning outcome, their performance levels, and use of acquired knowledge and skills in their workplace (review in Smith, Jayasuriya, Caputi, & Hammer, 2008). Therefore, workplace training is important construct in relation to organizational learning and knowledge management. Adult learning theory puts an emphasis on the necessity of adults wanting to learn; if not, their lack of motivation will impair learning and an organization will experience a loss of financial and time resources and receive nothing in return (Cohen, 1990). A study from Dysvik & Kuvaas (2008) showed that a relationship between perceived training op- portunities and organizational citizenship behaviour 3 “Our last assumption is that only an over-all, lifelong education can produce the kind of complete man the need for whom is increasing with the continually more stringent constraints tearing the individual asunder. We should no longer assiduously acquire knowledge once and for all, but learn how to build up a continually evolving body of knowledge all through life—'learn to be'” (Faure, 1972, p. vi). 4 Workplace learning differs from the traditional teacher – student learning in the classroom in terms of being more complex experiential process (Bauer et al., 2004). 5 The terms “training motivation” and “motivation for the workplace training” are used interchangeably in this paper. Another branch of motivation is work motivation, which differs from training motivation mostly in terms of being broader and thus comprising different aspects of work, including training; it is the process of empowering employ- ees’ behaviour and level of their effort at work (review in Yilmaz, 2013). 6 Workplace training refers to employees’ professional development – acquisition of skills and knowledge that account for personal and career advancement and can result in better performance on tasks the job requires (Ouellet, 2012). Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 Ingrid Molan, Eva Boštjančič: How do Epistemological Beliefs Affect Training Motivation? 60 was mediated by intrinsic motivation7. This means that training and development of employees could increase organizational citizenship behaviour when intrinsically motivated employees hold a positive perception of training and development. This find- ing could help managers understand why highly in- trinsically motivated employees should be given opportunities for training and development – when they perceive it positively, they will demonstrate be- haviours of added value from training and develop- ment in the workplace. Therefore, having known the impact of motivation, one should investigate the antecedents of training motivation. This paper ex- amines whether epistemological beliefs could rep- resent one of the variables that influence motivation for the workplace learning. Paulsen & Feldman (1999) reported statistically significant relations between dimensions of episte- mological belief system and motivational constructs (such as task value, self-efficacy, intrinsic and extrin- sic goal orientation, test anxiety, control of learning). Results on a college student sample showed that learners with belief of knowledge being simple (i.e. naïve belief) were less likely to appreciate the value of learning task, felt that their capacity to learn is less efficacious, perceived an external control over learn- ing, and hold an extrinsic goal orientation, compared with students having more sophisticated belief sys- tem. Ravindran, Greene & DeBacker (2005) investi- gated the relation among epistemological beliefs, achievement goal, application learning and cognitive engagement of prospective teachers and found that the goal and belief were important for predicting meaningful and shallow cognitive engagement. Stu- dents with naïve belief system (thinking of knowl- edge as simple, certain, obtainable quickly, and from authorities) were inclined to shallow processing. Kizil- gunes, Tekkaya & Sengur (2009) proposed a model of possible association between epistemological be- liefs, achievement motivation and learning outcomes and thus hypothesized that epistemological beliefs contribute to both constructs directly. Their study re- sults suggested a direct influence of epistemological beliefs on learning approach and indirect influence on achievement through motivation. 1.3 Research Question As seen above, relation between epistemolog- ical beliefs and motivation has been found in school setting. Therefore, this study’s main question is whether employees’ epistemological beliefs could have a similar effect in the actual participation in the workplace training. Thus, the purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between epistemo- logical beliefs, motivation and actual participation in the workplace training. Let us state our hypothesises. (1) There will be a positive relation between epis- temological beliefs and motivation for the work- place training (the more sophisticated beliefs, the higher the motivation) as well as for the ac- tual participation in the workplace training. (2) Epistemological beliefs will predict the training motivation and actual participation in the work- place training. (3) There will be a positive correlation between motivation and actual participation in the work- place training. (4) With age, the epistemological beliefs will re- main constant. We expect the results to provide us with infor- mation regarding the impact of epistemological be- liefs on motivation and participation in the workplace training as this could assist HR depart- ments or employers to understand the issue behind their employees’ motivation and success at the workplace training and learning. 2. METHODOLOGY 2.1 Sample The sample included Slovenians employees. The number of participants was 289; 80 male and 208 female (one participant did not indicate his/her gender). Their age ranged from 17 to 64 with an av- erage of 39.09 (SD = 17.46). 7 Intrinsic motivation represents the engagement in the activity for its own sake because the reward is the satisfaction associated with the activity itself (Deci, 1971). Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 61 2.2 Instrument Instrument was composed of four parts: demo- graphical questions, the Epistemic Belief Inventory, Training Motivation Questionnaire, and training hours in the last 12 months (representing the actual participation in the workplace training). Demographical questions included: gender, age, level of education, role (manager, non-man- ager), years of service in current position, and em- ployment sector. There were 10 levels of education given: Unfinished primary education, Finished pri- mary education, Short vocational upper secondary education (2 years), Vocational upper secondary ed- ucation (3 years), Secondary school, First cycle pro- fessional education/higher vocational education, Undergraduate studies (1st Bologna cycle), Gradu- ate studies (2nd Bologna cycle), Master of science/Specialization, and Doctorate. As for the employment sector there were three options given: public sector, private sector and other where par- ticipants alleged the sector. The Epistemic Belief Inventory (EBI; Schraw et al., 2002) is a 32-item instrument based on theoreti- cal background of Schommer’s (1990) four dimen- sions of epistemological belief system and added omniscient authority. Thus, these five factors in- clude omniscient authority (e.g. “People shouldn’t question authority.”), certain knowledge (e.g. “What is true is a matter of opinion.”), quick learning (e.g. “If you don’t learn something quickly, you won’t ever learn it.), simple knowledge (e.g. “The best ideas are often the most simple.”), and innate ability (e.g. “Some people are born with special gifts and talents.”). Individuals respond to the particular statement on a 5-point Likert agreement scale (1 is “strongly disagree” and 5 is “strongly agree”). Lower scores indicate more sophisticated beliefs. In order to adjust EBI to the workplace setting, some ques- tions (21.88% of all the questions) referring to the school setting were adjusted accordingly (e.g. “Stu- dents who learn things quickly are the most success- ful.” was rewritten into “Employees who learn quickly are the most successful.”). The inventory was translated into Slovenian language. Authors of this research conducted a question- naire named Training Motivation Questionnaire (see Appendix) that was used for measuring motivation for workplace training. Six statements were repre- senting a positive attitude towards workplace train- ing and six of them the negative. Participants were asked to indicate their agreement with the state- ment on the Likert type of scale (1 is “strongly dis- agree” and 5 is “strongly agree”). 2.3 Data Analysis To test the empirical structure of epistemolog- ical beliefs and training motivation the factor analy- sis was performed. ULS and PCA were used as extraction methods (eigenvalue criterion and Scree plot) with Varimax rotation. To test hypothesises one and three the Spear- man’s rho was used. For testing the hypothesis two the simple regression was used and One-way ANOVA was used to test the hypothesis four. 2.4 Results The Shapiro-Wilk normality test showed a non- normal distribution of results on EBI as well as on Training Motivation Questionnaire. The ULS analysis of EBI yielded a five-factor solution (see Table 1) with 22 items remaining, explaining 35.08% of the total variance (Cronbach’s alpha = .69). None of the factors could have been assigned any of the a-priori factors reported by Schraw at al. (2002), except for the factor 3 that could have represented the innate ability. The score on EBI was computed as a sum of average scores on particular factors. The distribu- tion of the sum scores was normally distributed (SW = .997, df = 265, p = .889). N of items retained Eigenvalue Variance explained (%) Factor 1 8 2.59 11.78 Factor 2 4 1.64 7.46 Factor 3 3 1.25 5.69 Factor 4 4 1.21 5.48 Factor 5 3 1.03 4.67 Table 1: Number of items loading on factors, eigenvalues after rotation and variance explained for the five-factor structure of epistemological beliefs. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 Ingrid Molan, Eva Boštjančič: How do Epistemological Beliefs Affect Training Motivation? 62 The PCA analysis of Training Motivation Ques- tionnaire yielded one-factor solution with 8 items remaining (see Appendix), all of which explained 52.8% of the total variance (Cronbach’s alpha = .86). The scored training motivation did not distribute normally. The relationship between epistemological be- liefs and motivation for the workplace training was negative, r = –.227, p ≤ .000. Epistemological beliefs and actual participation in the workplace training were negatively correlated, r = –.215, p = .001, which means that the hypothesis 1 cannot be con- firmed. The simple regression analysis showed that epistemological beliefs significantly predicted moti- vation for the workplace training, β = 5.02, t(244) = 32.12, p ≤ .000 and explained a significant propor- tion of the variance in training motivation scores, R2 = .05, F(1, 244) = 13.61, p ≤ .000. Epistemological beliefs significantly predicted the actual participa- tion in the workplace training, β = 82.79, t(221) = 2.97, p = .003 and non-significantly explained a pro- portion of the variance in the hours of the actual participation in the workplace training, R2 = .004, F(1, 221) = .96, p = .33, which means the hypothesis 2 may be partially true. Motivation for the workplace training was sig- nificantly related to the actual participation in the workplace training, r = .258, ≤ .000; hence the hy- pothesis 3 is confirmed. In support of the hypothesis 4, age did not af- fect the epistemological beliefs, F(42, 221) = 1.44, p = .051, therefore we could keep the hypothesis. Due to lack of research on epistemological be- liefs in the work environment, we did not hypothe- sise about other possible relationships and effects the examined three concepts might have. However, the demographical information in the study was chosen upon foreseeing possible variables that might affect epistemological beliefs, training moti- vation and the actual participation in the workplace training. Here we report some results that could be drawn from the observed data. T-test showed that there is no significant differ- ence in epistemological beliefs between managers (M = 8.19) and non-managers (M = 8.38), t(236) = – .523, p = .602. In addition, Mann-Whitney U test re- ported no difference in their training motivation (Mdn = 4.63 for managers and non-managers) ei- ther, U = 5845.5, p = .501, z = –.66, r = –.04, nor the actual participation in the workplace training, U = 5300, p = .154, z = –1.43, r = –.09, Mdnnon-managers = 25.0, Mdnmanagers = 34.0. Nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test showed a significant difference in hours of actual participation in the workplace training according to individuals’ level of education (H = 17.46, p = .015). One-way ANOVA test showed a significant difference in epis- temological beliefs (F(8, 255) = 2.44, p = .015). Post hoc tests could not have been performed due to too few cases in some groups of education level. There was no significant difference in their motivation for workplace learning (H = 12.42, p = .134). Mann-Whitney U test showed that women (Mdn = 4.75) significantly differ from men (Mdn = 4.37) in training motivation, U = 5563, p = .001, z = –3.24, r = –.20. However, no difference was found in actual participation in the workplace training (U = 5644.50, p = .289, z = –1.06, r = –.07) between men (Mdn = 34.0) and women (Mdn = 25.0) nor epistemological beliefs (t(262) = 1.04, p = .298, Mwomen = 8.24, Mmen = 8.54). Years in service in current position significantly affected the epistemological beliefs (F(99, 164) = 1.512, p = .010). Post hoc tests could not have been performed because there were more than 50 groups. Years in service in current position do not, however, have any effect on training motivation (H = 102.46, p = .282) nor actual participation in the workplace training (H = 86.49, p = .722). Employment sector significantly distinguishes among individuals’ actual participation in the work- place training (H = 6.56, p = .038) as well as episte- mological beliefs (F(2, 240) = 3.99, p = .020). Post hoc tests with Mann Whitney U test showed a sig- nificant difference (p = .009) in actual participation in the workplace training between the people who work in public sector (M = 58.5) and other sectors (M = 24.5). As “other sector”, participants indicated either a non-governmental organization or did not provide any explanation. Games-Howell’s post hoc test showed there is an important difference (p = .02) in epistemological beliefs between the employ- Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 63 ees in public sector (M = 7.92) and private sector (M = 8.65). The workplace motivation is not effected by employment sector (H = 3.21, p = .210). 2.5 Disscusion For the past 60 years, epistemological beliefs have been a topic of research primarily in the school environment. Very little has been done in this field regarding epistemological beliefs of individuals once they finish education and employ themselves. Hence, this paper investigates epistemological be- liefs in work settings in Slovenia, more precisely, the relationship between epistemological beliefs, train- ing motivation and actual participation in the work- place training. The results showed a negative relation between epistemological beliefs and motivation for training, which is contrary to predicted positive correlation. Similarly, it was demonstrated that the correlation between epistemological beliefs and actual partici- pation in the workplace training is negative, too, al- beit predicted positive relationship. Negative relationship is unexpected as other researchers (e.g. Paulsen & Feldman, 1999; Kizilgunes, Tekkaya & Sengur, 2009) reported a positive relationship be- tween epistemological beliefs and motivation. Stu- dents’ motivation level was lower if they held more naïve beliefs compared to students with the more sophisticated beliefs. Moreover, epistemological be- liefs seem to contribute to achievement through motivation. People whose epistemological beliefs are less sophisticated are less likely to perceive the workplace as a learning environment (Bauer et al., 2004) and are thus less likely to engage themselves in workplace training. Possible explanation of the results may be found in the limitations of the study (see Conclusion). Motivation has an impact on how an employee will react to the training programme, how they will perform, how much they will learn and whether they will transfer the gained knowledge to their work (review in Smith et al., 2008). That is why it is essential to study motivation for the workplace training, as in order to stay competitive on today’s market, employers have to invest in development of their workforce. Results in our study indicated that epistemological beliefs could predict both the mo- tivation for the workplace training and the actual participation in the workplace training, however the variance explained is small which means that one should examine other possible predictors. More- over, the relationship between motivation and ac- tual participation proved to be significant and positive, although the correlation is small. This means that people who are more motivated to at- tend the workplace training actually participate more frequently. The possible other predictors of training moti- vation can be extracted from other studies. Colquitt et al. (2000) conducted a meta-analysis of the train- ing motivation literature, trying to identify the prox- imal and distal factors8 that influence the training motivation. They reported that, for example, locus of control was related to motivation to learn (indi- viduals with internal locus of control were more mo- tivated to learn). They found that the proximal factors that mediate the training motivation are self- efficacy, valence9 and career variables whereas the distal factors were personality, age and situational variables. Career variables, job involvement, orga- nizational commitment, career planning, and career exploration positively correlated with training mo- tivation. Individuals that value learning outcomes showed higher level of motivation. Smith et al. (2008) reported that the proximal factors (self-effi- cacy, expectancy and valence) explained 43% of the variance of goal intentions; in addition, goal inten- tions related to the training outcomes (affective re- actions, utility reactions and transfer intentions). Therefore, they conclude that goal intentions can be used as an alternative measure of motivational as- pects of training. Merkač Skok (2013) reported another possible antecedent of training motivation. She found that possibility for promotion affects employees training 8 Proximal factors are factors that have a direct impact on training motivation whereas the distal factor affect moti- vation through the proximal factors (Colquitt et al., 2000). 9 Valence refers to an individual’s ideas about the desirability of certain outcomes over others (Smith et al., 2008). Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 Ingrid Molan, Eva Boštjančič: How do Epistemological Beliefs Affect Training Motivation? 64 motivation and motivation for lifelong learning as knowledge and work experience influence the pos- sibility for development and career. Cohen (1990) was investigating the managerial role and its impact on motivation for workplace training. She reported that employees were more motivated when their supervisors were supportive and when employees perceived the attendance to the workplace training as voluntary rather than mandatory; employees believed that the voluntary nature of the attendance motivated them to actu- ally attend the training. Facteau et al. (1995) found that variables that relate to pre-training motivation are social support variables (environmental favourability for training), intrinsic incentives, reputation of the training, orga- nizational commitment, and compliance. They, as well, showed in their study that managers, who were less likely to attend the training because it was mandatory, demonstrated higher levels of motiva- tion to attend training. Contrary to what the authors expected, extrinsic incentives, career exploration, and career planning were not related to managers’ motivation. This finding differs from conclusion of Cohen (1990); however, this might be due to differ- ent populations (managers vs. subordinates). Some authors (e.g. Mathieu, Tannenbaum & Salas, 1992), on the other hand, reported non-correlation among those variables. There is another explanation in the theory of motivation. Expectancy-value theory (Wigfield & Ec- cles, 2000) explains how people engage themselves in a learning activity only when they perceive it to be of a personal value and expect to perform suc- cessfully. Although some authors (e.g. Schommer, 1990, 1993; Cano, 2005) report about the change in epis- temological beliefs in high school students over time in terms of transforming naïve beliefs into sophisti- cated and complex beliefs, we predicted that epis- temological beliefs should not significantly change with age once an individual finishes with formal ed- ucation. An individual with already sophisticated epistemological belief system cannot have even more sophisticated one; unless there is a change in certain dimensions of epistemological beliefs, as people can be sophisticated in some beliefs and naïve in others (Schommer, 1990). This, however, was not analysed due to unstable structure of epis- temological beliefs system as it was found in the present study. Epistemic Belief Inventory The 5-factorial structure of EBI did not prove to be representing the same factors as supposed by Schraw et al. (2002). Innate ability could have been extracted from the results, however, the other four factors failed to be contently homogenous and thus none of the a-priori named factors could be recog- nized. Overall, the inventory did not offer a solid representation of epistemological belief system as supposed by Schraw et al. (2002). Hofer & Pintrich (1997) discuss the problematic Schommer’s four-dimensional structure of episte- mological belief system. They report that simple knowledge and certain knowledge appear consis- tent across studies and with other epistemological models and theories (see Hofer & Pintrich, 1997) whereas other factors do not invariably follow that pattern. They state that, for example, fixed ability concerns more the nature of intelligence as a psy- chological trait of an individual rather than an epis- temological dimension. Similarly, quick learning seems to be a perception of the difficulty of a par- ticular learning task and a goal about the learning, which can be distinguished from knowledge, even though the concepts could be related. In some of the studies innate ability loaded on the quick learn- ing factor. In addition, the fifth hypothesised factor (omniscient authority) still has to be empirically val- idated. However, Schraw et al. (2002) included it into their inventory and confirmed the structure of five factors. Ogrin (2012) used EBI on a sample of Sloveni- ans secondary school students and found that in order to follow the five-factor structure, she had to eliminate five items. The five-factor structure ex- plained 41.48% of the variance of the EBI, whereas the authors of the inventory reported the 60% of variance explained. The reliabilities for particular factors were lower than the ones reported by the authors of the inventory. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 65 3. CONCLUSION The purpose of this study was to see whether epistemological belief system could predict the training motivation and the actual participation in the workplace training. Knowing the antecedents of motivation for the workplace training is important as nowadays workplace training has become one of the crucial competitive edges. Hence, the knowl- edge about how to motivate employees to engage themselves in the workplace training could be of help as the motivation affects not only the interest in learning but also the learning outcomes. Our study showed ambiguous conclusions. Epistemolog- ical beliefs could predict the training motivation and the actual participation in the workplace training, however, with little variance explained. On the other hand, the relationship between the concepts did not prove to be the same as in previous studies. Before coming to conclusion, we should men- tion the limitations of the study. EBI was primarily constructed for measuring epistemological beliefs in students; in this study, however, it was used in the sample of adult employees. This is, to our knowl- edge, the second use of EBI in Slovenia, which means that the inventory still lacks a validation in Slovenian workplace environment. Furthermore, some of the items were adjusted to the workplace setting. The Training Motivation Questionnaire was conducted by the authors of the study and even though there could have been one-factor extracted, the distribution across the items and collective score is not normal. Hours of actual participation in- dicated that there is little or no variation across the sample in their attendance of the workplace train- ing, which could reflect non-normality in distribu- tion of epistemological belief system and motivation as the constructs proved to be correlated. The questions about the construct validity of epistemological beliefs still remain and are expected to be addressed in subsequent research. It is still un- clear what EBI measures and to what extent the measure is the construct of epistemological belief system. Furthermore, the structure of epistemologi- cal beliefs should be examined in the adults once they finish formal education. Perhaps, non-normally reflects the fact that individuals’ epistemological be- liefs develop fully by the end of formal education. On the other hand, little is yet known about develop- ment of sophisticated epistemological beliefs. This is, (1) how they develop over the years and in adulthood and (2) how the development and learning process could be facilitated in order to help individuals ac- quire more sophisticated epistemological belief sys- tem, although studies report that age and education positively relate to epistemological beliefs. As for the training motivation, the research on already studied antecedents should continue in order to give us a clearer insight into the construct. Future studies could also investigate the impact of the training motivation on actual use of gained knowledge in the workplace; this is to what extent trainees learn and use obtained knowledge at their work. This could provide us with information about the effect of training motivation on organizational learning and knowledge management. EXTENDED SUMMARY / IZVLEČEK V globaliziranem svetu je vlaganje v zaposlene ključen dejavnik konkurenčne prednosti na trgu. Usposabljanje na delovnem mestu je eden izmed načinov vlaganja v lasten kader; raziskave pa kažejo, da ima prav izobraževanje pozitiven učinek na učinkovitost in razvoj organizacije (Ji, Huang, Liu, Zhu in Cai, 2012). Motivacija je tista, ki vpliva na pripravljenost in dejansko udeležbo posameznikov na dodatnih izobraževanjih in usposabljanjih, hkrati pa stopnja motivacije za usposabljanje vpliva tudi na predpriprave zaposlenih na izobraževanje, njihov odziv na izobraževanje, učne rezultate in uporabo pridobljenega znanja na delovnem mestu (pregled v Smith, Jayasuriya, Caputi in Hammer, 2008). Ta dejstva nas nagovarjajo k raziskovanju dejavnikov, ki vplivajo na motivacijo za izobraževanje. Namen raziskave je bil raziskati odnos med epistemološkimi prepričanji in motivacijo za izobraževanje na de- lovnem mestu, kot tudi dejansko udeležbo na izobraževanjih, saj bi poznavanje tega odnosa lahko Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 Ingrid Molan, Eva Boštjančič: How do Epistemological Beliefs Affect Training Motivation? 66 pripomoglo k razumevanju razlogov za delavčevo (ne)motivacijo za izobraževanje in (ne)uspešno udeležbo na usposabljanju. Epistemološka prepričanja, prepričanja o naravi znanja in védenja, so zadnjih šestdeset let pred- met raziskovanja predvsem na področju šolstva. Začetnik raziskovanja tega področja je bil Perry (pre- gled v Hofer in Pintrich, 1997), ki je razvoj epistemološki prepričanj pojmoval kot postopnega. Kasnejše raziskave so zaradi nekonsistentnosti ugotovitev pripeljale M. Schommer (1990) do razumevanja epistemoloških prepričanj kot večdimenzionalnega koncepta (in ne enodimenzionalnega kot je veljalo prej). Tako je M. Schommer opredelila štiri faktorje epistemoloških prepričanj: enos- tavnost znanja, hitrost učenja, vrojenost sposobnosti in gotovost znanja; nekateri avtorji pa dodajajo tudi peti faktor – vsevednost avtoritete (pregled v Schraw idr., 2002). Epistemološka prepričanja so lahko naivna ali sofisticirana, Bath in Smith (2009) pa ugotavljata, da so posamezniki s sofisticiranimi epistemološkimi prepričanji bolj nagnjeni k vseživljenjskemu učenju. Paulsen in Feldman (1999), ki sta raziskovala epistemološka prepričanja pri študentih, sta ugotovila, da se le-ta povezujejo z moti- vacijskimi konstrukti. Podobno ugotavljajo Kizilgunes, Tekkaya in Sengur (2009), ki so oblikovali model, ki povezuje epistemološka prepričanja, storilnostno motivacijo in učne izide, ter predpostavljajo, da epistemološka prepričanja prispevajo k obema konstruktoma. Povezava med epistemološkimi prepričanji in motivacijo je v šolskem okolju vidna, nas pa je zan- imala morebitna povezanost konstruktov na delovnem mestu; okolju, kjer raziskav o epistemoloških prepričanjih primanjkuje. Predvidevali smo, da bodo epistemološka prepričanja in motivacijo za do- datno izobraževanje na delovnem mestu kot tudi dejansko udeležbo na izobraževanjih pozitivno povezani. Dalje smo predvidevali, da bo z epistemološkimi prepričanji moč napovedati motivacijo za izobraževanje, prav tako pa tudi dejansko udeležbo na usposabljanjih. Pričakovali smo pozitivno povezanost motivacije in dejanske udeležbe na izobraževanju, prav tako pa predvidevali, da bodo z leti epistemološka prepričanja ostala konstantna. V raziskavi je sodelovalo 289 zaposlenih starih od 17 do 64 let, ki so odgovorili na vprašalnik, sestavljen iz štirih delov: demografska vprašanja, Vprašalnik epistemoloških prepričaj (Epistemic Belief Inventory – EBI; Schraw idr., 2002), ki je bil uporabljen za merjenje epistemoloških prepričanj, Vprašalnik motivacije za izobraževanje ter vprašanja o številu opravljenih izobraževalnih ur. Rezultati so pokazali negativno povezavo med epistemološkimi prepričanji in motivacijo, kar je nasprotno predvideni smeri korelacije. Regresijska analiza je pokazala, da epistemološka prepričanja statistično značilno napovedujejo motivacijo za izobraževanje na delovnem mestu, a je delež variance, ki ga pojasnjuje majhen. Napoved dejanske udeležbe na usposabljanju s pomočjo epistemoloških prepričanj se ni izkazala za statistično pomembno. Podatki kažejo, da sta motivacija za izobraževanje in dejanska udeležba na usposabljanju pozitivno povezani, starost pa ne vpliva na epistemološka prepričanja. Zaradi pomanjkanja raziskav na področju epistemoloških prepričanj v delovnem okolju drugih možnih povezav med konstrukti nismo predpostavljali, v rezultatih pa kljub temu navajamo nekaj ugotovitev, ki jih lahko izpeljemo iz pridobljenih podatkov. Vprašalnik EBI ni prikazal pričakovane strukture. Po izločitvi postavk preostale postavke niso nasičile istih faktorjev, kot to predvidevajo av- torji vprašalnika. V zaključku navajamo omejitve raziskave ter predloge za nadaljnje raziskovanje. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 67 REFERENCES Abdul Aziz, S. F., & Ahmad, S. (2011). Stimulation training motivation using the right training characteristic. In- dustrial and commercial training, 43 (1), 53–61. Bath, D. M., & Smith, C. D. (2009). The relationship be- tween epistemological beliefs and the propensity for lifelong learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 31 (2), 137–189. Bauer, J., Festner, D., Gruber, H., Harteis, C., & Heid, H. (2004). The effects of epistemological beliefs on work- place learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 5 (6), 284–292. Boden, C. J. (2005). An exploratory study of the relation- ship between epistemological beliefs and self-directed learning readiness. Unpublished doctoral disserta- tion, Kansas State University. Brownlee, J., Nailon, D., & Tickle, E. (2010). Constructing leadership in child care: Epistemological beliefs and transformational leadership. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 35 (3), 95–104. Cano, F. (2005). Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning: Their change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 203–221. Cavallo, A., Rozman, M., Blickenstaff, J., & Walker, N. (2003). Learning, reasoning, motivation and epistemological beliefs. Journal of College Science Teaching, 33, 18–23. Cohen, D. J. (November 1990). What motivates trainees? Training & Development Journal, 91–93. Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (2000). Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: a meta- analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 678–707. Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and So- cial Psychology, 18, 105–115. Dysvik, A., & Kuvaas, B. (2008). The relationship between perceived training opportunities, work motivation and employee outcomes. International Journal of Training and Development, 12 (3), 138–157. Facteau, J. D., Dobbins, G. H., Russell, J. E. A., Ladd, R. T., & Kudisch, J. D. (1995). The influence of general per- ceptions of the training environment on pretraining motivation and perceived training transfer. Journal of Management, 21, 1–25. Faure, E., Herrera, F., Kaddoura, A.-R., Lopes, H., Petro- vsky, A. V., Rahnema, M., et al. (1972). Learning to Be (The world of education today and tomorrow). UN- ESCO: Paris. Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67 (1), 88–140. Ji, L., Huang, J., Liu, Z., Zhu, H., & Cai, Z. (2012). The ef- fects of employee training on the relationship be- tween environmental attitude and firms' performance in sustainable development. The Inter- national Journal of Human Resource Management, 23 (14), 2995–3008. Kizilgunes, B., Tekkaya, C., & Sungar, S. (2009). Modelling the relations among students' epistemological beliefs, motivation, learning approach, and achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 102 (4), 243–255. Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Salas, E. (1992). In- fluences of individual and situational characteristics on measure of training effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 35 (4), 828–847. Merkač Skok, M. (2013). Some characteristics that influ- ence motivation for learning in organizations. Inter- disciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 11 (2), 254–265. Ogrin, M. (2012). Epistemološka prepričanja o učenju in znanju v povezavi z uporabo učnih strategij pri gim- nazijcih. Unpublished degree dissertation, University of Ljubljana: Faculty of Arts. Ouellet, S. (2012). Workplace training: How context im- pacts on instructor' activities. Relations industrielles/ Industrial relations, 67 (2), 222–241. Paulsen, M. B., & Feldman, K. A. (1999). Student motiva- tion and epistemological beliefs. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 78, 17–25. Ravindran, B., Greene, B. A., & Debacker, T. K. (2005). Pre- dicting preservice teachers’ cognitive engagement with goals and epistemological beliefs. The Journal of Educational Research, 98, 222–232. Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educa- tional Psychology, 82 (3), 498–504. Schommer, M. (1993). Comparison of beliefs about the nature of knowledge and learning among postsec- ondary students. Research in Higer Education, 34 (3), 355–370. Schommer, M., Calvert, C., Gariglietti, G., & Bajaj, A. (1997). The development of epistemological beliefs among secondary students: A longitudinal study. Jour- nal of Educational Psychology, 89 (1), 37–40. Schraw, G., Bendixen, L. D., & Dunkle, M. E. (2002). De- velopment and validation of the Epistemic Belief In- ventory (EBI). In Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (Ed.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 261–275). Mah- wah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Schwitzgebel, E. (2006). Belief. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford, CA: The Metaphysics Research Lab. Available from http://plato. stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/belief/ Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, May 2014 Ingrid Molan, Eva Boštjančič: How do Epistemological Beliefs Affect Training Motivation? 68 Smith, R., Jayasuriya, R., Caputi, P., & Hammer, D. (2008). Exploring the role of goal theory in understanding training motivation. International Journal of Training and Development, 12 (1), 54–72. Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia. (n. d.). Stan- dard Classification of Activities. Available from http://www.stat.si/klasje/tabela.aspx?cvn=5531 Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value the- ory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Edu- cational Psychology, 25, 68–81. Yilmaz, B. (2013). Work motivation of academic staff that work in the field of physical education and sports. In- ternational Journal of Academic Research, 5 (6), 125– 130. APPENDIX Items Comprising the Training Motivation Ques- tionnaire 1. I am happy to attend any workplace training my manager suggests. 2. I pre-prepare myself before I attend the work- place training. 3. I attend the workplace training only if it is held during my working hours. 4. If possible, I avoid any workplace trainings. 5. I would rather work extra hours than attend the workplace training. 6. I like attending seminars and workplace train- ing. 7. I believe I already have all the knowledge needed for what I do. 8. Workplace trainings variegate my work. 9. I am interested into workplace training. 10. I do not like workplace training. 11. I believe I can improve my work with trainings’ knowledge. 12. I attend the workplace training only on my man- ager’s demand. Notes All items were presented in Slovenian language. Items 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 were used to compute a score for training motivation.