Understanding student participation in teaching evaluations: a systematic review of psychological motivators and barriers

Abstract

Purpose Student evaluation of teaching (SET) are pivotal to quality assurance in higher education, yet participation rates remain inconsistent. Despite considerable research on structural influences, limited attention has been given to the psychological processes underlying students’ participation, with little systematic integration within motivational frameworks. This review aims to examine psychological determinants shaping students’ participation in SET through the complementary lenses of self-determination theory (SDT) and expectancy–value theory (EVT). Design/methodology/approach A comprehensive search across four databases following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses 2020 guidelines identified 29 peer-reviewed empirical studies, which were screened, coded and thematically analysed within SDT and EVT constructs. Findings Perceived usefulness of feedback, intrinsic motivation and sense of responsibility towards the academic community were the most consistent motivators. Key barriers included distrust in feedback utility, limited transparency, anonymity concerns, fear of repercussions and time constraints. Extrinsic incentives improved response rates in some studies but did not reliably enhance feedback quality; reducing survey length did not consistently improve participation, indicating structural changes alone are insufficient without addressing motivational factors. Practical implications Institutions should foster transparent, autonomy-supportive evaluation environments that explicitly communicate how student feedback informs improvement. Grade-contingent incentives should be replaced with trust-based engagement strategies. Originality/value This review provides a systematic integration of SDT and EVT as complementary frameworks for understanding SET participation behaviour and proposes evidence-informed recommendations to foster evaluation environments that cultivate trust, thereby strengthening SET as a credible quality assurance mechanism in higher education.