國中生學業情緒、情境興趣及學習涉入的交互關係

黃筠婷; 程炳林

doi:10.6251/BEP.202103_52(3).0004

山西大学，您好！

感谢采购，人社期刊库｜人社论文库，期间：2024/01/01~2024/12/31

感谢试用，科学期刊库｜科学论文库，期间：2024/10/20~2025/01/20

浏览高级检索

关闭
检索检索高级检索出版物检索
浏览期刊主题浏览核心期刊浏览期刊拼音浏览

关闭

查询符号(半角)	查询符号意义说明
空格	表示为「AND」两个查询词之交集
双引号 ( " " )	片语以双引号标示开始及结束，而且只寻找出现顺序相同的字词，例： " image process "
?	表示一个字母切截，输入两个?表两个字母，依此类推，例：输入「Appl?」，查得结果应为appl e , appl y … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
*	表示不限字母切截，由0~n. 例：输入「appl*」，查得结果应为appl e , appl es , appl y , appl ied , appl ication … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
AND、OR、NOT	布尔逻辑组合关键字，用来扩大或缩小查询范围的技巧。 (1) AND ：缩小查询范围 (2) OR ：扩大查询范围(3) NOT：排除不相关的范围

DOI 是数位物件识别码（ D igital O bject I dentifier ）的简称，
为物件在网路上的唯一识别码，可用于永久连结并引用目标物件。

使用DOI作为永久连结

每个DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」便成为永久网址。
如以DOI号为 10.5297/ser.1201.002 的文献为例，此文献的永久连结便是： http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5297/ser.1201.002 。
日后不论出版单位如何更动此文献位置，永久连结所指向的位置皆会即时更新，不再错失重要的研究。

引用含有DOI的文献

有DOI的文献在引用时皆应同时引用DOI。若使用APA、Chicago以外未规范DOI的引用格式，可引用DOI永久连结。

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考（）。

ACI:

数据来源：Academic Citation Index，简称ACI

台湾最大的引用文献资料库，目前收录台湾与港澳地区所出版的人文学、社会学领域学术期刊之书目资料与参考文献，总期刊量超过690种，每年定期公布收录期刊的影响指数(Impact Factor)等指标给大众，并提供专家学者与学术单位实用的计量与分析功能。

五年影响指数（5-Year Impact Factor）：某一期刊前五年所出版的文章在当年度的平均被引用次数。

公式：（前五年发表论文在统计年的被引用次数）÷（前五年论文产出论文总篇数）

例如：A期刊2017年之五年影响指数

(A期刊2012-2016年发表论文在2017年的被引总次数)/(A期刊2012-2016年发表的论文总数)

什么是预刊文章？

为提供读者最前线之学术资讯，于期刊文献获同意刊登后、纸本印制完成前，率先于网路线上发表之文章即为预刊文章。预刊文章尚未有卷期、页次及出版日期资讯，但可藉由DOI号识别。 DOI号是文献的数位身份证字号，不论预刊或正式出版皆不会改变，读者可点击DOI连结，或于DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」连结到文献目前最新版本。

如何引用预刊文章？

请使用预刊文章的线上发表日期及DOI号来引用该篇文献。

引用范例(视不同引文格式规范可能有所差异)：

作者姓名。文章篇名。期刊名称。 YYYY/MM/DD线上预先发表。

doi:DOI 号

来源数据

P571 - 593

社会科学 > 心理学
社会科学 > 教育学

DOI： 10.6251/BEP

书目管理工具

相关连结

问题回报

全文下载

国中生学业情绪、情境兴趣及学习涉入的交互关系

Study on Reciprocal Relations among Academic Emotions, Situational Interest, and Learning Engagement

黄筠婷(Yun-Ting Huang) ；程炳林(Biing-Lin Cherng)

教育心理学报； 52 卷 3 期 (2021 / 03 / 01) ， P571 - 593

繁体中文 DOI： 10.6251/BEP.202103_52(3).0004

交互效果；情境兴趣；学业情绪；学习涉入；纵贯研究； reciprocal relation ； situational interest ； academic emotions ； learning engagement ； longitudinal study

0 个人觉得这篇文章赞

摘要 │ 参考文献 (56) │ 被引用文献 (13) │ 国际计量

摘要〈TOP〉

并列摘要〈TOP〉

In educational psychology research, researchers have highlighted problems in students' learning. In fact, many researchers have suggested that students' learning processes are more crucial than their learning outcomes are (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003; Schraw et al., 2001). However, little attention has been paid to students' learning activities and processes; therefore, they formed the focus of the present study. Educational psychology researchers have used learning engagement to describe behaviors in students' learning processes (Putwain et al., 2019). Learning engagement has been defined as the degree to which students participate and engage in learning activities, and it is a critical behavior in active learning. Several studies have demonstrated that learning engagement is closely related to learning motivation, situational interest, and academic emotions (Ainley & Ainley, 2011; Pekrun & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2012). To investigate academic emotions, researchers in educational psychology have mostly used academic emotion theory (Pekrun, 2006). On the basis of the influence of academic emotion processes, Pekrun (2006) proposed the cognitive-motivational model, which posits that academic emotions influence learners' cognition, motivation, and engagement, thereby influencing their learning achievement. Moreover, in return, learners' learning achievement subsequently influenced their motivation, engagement, and academic emotions, and their motivation and engagement influenced their academic emotions. Therefore, reciprocal relations exist between academic emotions and learning engagement, yet few studies have examined them. Furthermore, a close relationship exists between situational interest and students' learning engagement (Reschly et al., 2008). Situational interest is defined as temporary interest that arises spontaneously due to environmental factors (Hidi & Harackiewicz, 2000; Renninger & Hidi, 2002). Reeve and Tseng (2011) defined student engagement as a four-dimensional concept consisting of behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and agentic aspects. Much research has found that situational interest influences students' learning engagement (Lipstein & Renninger, 2006; Renninger & Shumer, 2002; Silvia, 2006). Some researchers found that situational interest enhanced students' learning engagement, which in turn influenced their situational interest (Ainley & Ainley, 2011). However, relevant studies have only used cross-sectional analyses; limited studies have examined these reciprocal relations. Therefore, the present study proposed a reciprocal relationship between situational interest and learning engagement. According to theoretical and empirical research, the present study constructed an academic emotion, situational interest, and learning engagement reciprocal effect model, which focused on the reciprocal relations between academic emotions (enjoyment and boredom) and learning engagement, situational interest, and learning engagement. The present study employed a longitudinal design to examine the reciprocal relations between these variables. Data collected from a longitudinal study with seventh-and eighth-grade junior high school students (N = 643; 302 boys) from 6 schools (25 classes) in Tainan City, Taiwan, were examined. Data collection was conducted in four waves. Participants were asked to complete the academic emotions scale (enjoyment and boredom), situational interest scale, and learning engagement scale. All scales referred to the students' Chinese classes. Attrition analyses revealed no significant differences in T_1 enjoyment and boredom between partially missing (N = 43) and complete samples; a significant difference existed in T_1 situational interest between partially missing and complete samples, but the effect size was small (η^2 = .01). Therefore, we used 600 complete samples in the subsequent analysis. Moreover, we analyzed the sex and grade-level differences of partially missing samples. The results indicated no significant differences between boys and girls in seventh and eighth grade among the partially missing samples. Finally, the present study used a class unit for sampling (nested data), which may have entailed clustering effects. According to Meuleman and Billie (2009), a group sample size of 40 in the between-level factor structure is sufficient. Only 25 classes were involved the present study; therefore, we standardized all variables by using a class as a unit to prevent class clustering effects (Dowding & Haufe, 2018). The present study applied structural equation modeling to analyze the data by using LISREL 8.80 and SPSS for Windows 23.0. To assess the model fit, we used well-established indices such as root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) ＜ .10, standardized root mean residual (SRMR) ＜ .05, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and comparative fit index (CFI) ＞ .95 in addition to chi-square test statistics. Data were analyzed in two steps. After a preliminary statistical analysis, we first examined descriptive statistics, sex and grade differences, and measurement invariance. Second, we examined the model fit by using two strategies: First, the reciprocal relations models were tested competitively against two unidirectional models. If the reciprocal model exhibited a better fit with the data, then the model of the present study was supported. Second, we examined the model fit and effects of all variables. Before analyzing the model, we first analyzed sex and grade differences. No significant differences existed between boys and girls in T_2 learning engagement, T_3 enjoyment, or T_4 learning engagement. However, significant differences existed between boys and girls in T_1 enjoyment, boredom, and situational interest and in T_3 boredom and situational interest, but the effect size was small (η^2 = .01 - .02). Moreover, no significant differences existed between the seventh and eighth grades for all variables. Hence, we did not use sex as a control variable. Second, we tested measurement invariance, which included configural, metric (weak factorial), scalar (strong factorial), and covariance. The results indicated that the boredom scale had strong measurement invariance, Δχ^2 (dfs= 1-5, N = 600) = 0.40-5.30, p ＞ .05, and the enjoyment, situational interest, and learning engagement scales had weak measurement invariance, Δχ^2 (dfs = 4-20, N = 600) = 2.21-23.62, p ＞ .05. According to Putnick and Bornstein (2016), if measurement scales indicate invariance for all variables over time, then they are suitable for longitudinal studies. First, the results of the present study indicated that the academic emotions, situational interest, and learning engagement reciprocal effect model had an excellent fit with the data χ_s^2 (242, N = 600) = 1401.06, 1196.29, p ＜ .05; RMSEAs = .093, .083; SRMRs = .047, .041; TLIs = .93, .97; CFIs = .98, .97. Second, the data analyses revealed reciprocal relations between enjoyment and learning engagement. Students' T_1 enjoyment enhanced their T_2 learning engagement. In turn, students' T_2 learning engagement positively predicted their T_3 enjoyment, and students' T_3 enjoyment enhanced their T_4 learning engagement. Third, reciprocal relations existed between boredom and learning engagement. Students' T_1 boredom reduced their T_2 learning engagement; in turn, students' T_2 learning engagement negatively predicted their T_3 boredom, and students' T_3 boredom reduced their T_4 learning engagement. Fourth, the data analyses revealed reciprocal relations between situational interest and learning engagement. Students' T_1 situational interest enhanced their T_2 learning engagement; in turn, students' T_2 learning engagement positively predicted their T_3 situational interest, and students' T_3 situational interest enhanced their T_4 learning engagement. To conclude, the present study demonstrated reciprocal relations between enjoyment/boredom and learning engagement as well as between situational interest and learning engagement. These findings expand the evidence base for the cognitive-motivational model and further understanding of the relationships among academic emotions, situational interest, and learning engagement.

参考文献 ( 56 ) 〈TOP〉

林宴瑛, Y.-Y.,程炳林, B.-L.(2012)。环境目标结构与控制－价值信念对课业情绪之效果。教育心理学报，44(1)，49-72。
连结：
彭淑玲, S.-L.(2017)。未来取向之自我调整学习模式考验暨检验课室目标结构的调节效果。教育心理学报，48(3)，371-397。
连结：
简嘉菱, C.-L.,程炳林, B.-L.(2018)。学业拖延与课业情绪之交互关系：课室目标结构的调节效果。教育心理学报，50(2)，293-313。
连结：
Ainley, M.,Ainley, J.(2011).Student engagement with science in early adolescence: The contribution of enjoyment to students’ continuing interest in learning about science.Contemporary Educational Psychology,36(1),4-12.
Bollen, K. A.(Ed.),Long, J. S.(Ed.)(1993).Testing structural equation models.Sage.

被引用文献 ( 13 ) 〈TOP〉

国际计量

〈TOP〉

E-mail ：

文章公开取用时，将寄通知信至您填写的信箱地址