ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Self-efficacy, satisfaction, and academic achievement: the mediator role of students' expectancy-value beliefs.

\r\nFernando Domnech-Betoret*

  • 1 Developmental and Educational Psychology, Jaume I University, Castellón, Spain
  • 2 Developmental and Educational Psychology, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain

Although there is considerable evidence to support the direct effects of self-efficacy beliefs on academic achievement, very few studies have explored the motivational mechanism that mediates the self-efficacy–achievement relationship, and they are necessary to understand how and why self-efficacy affects students' academic achievement. Based on a socio-cognitive perspective of motivation, this study examines the relationships among academic self-efficacy, students' expectancy-value beliefs, teaching process satisfaction, and academic achievement. Its main aim is to identify some motivational-underlying processes through which students' academic self-efficacy affects student achievement and satisfaction. Student achievement and satisfaction are two of the most important learning outcomes, and are considered key indicators of education quality. The sample comprises 797 Spanish secondary education students from 36 educational settings and three schools. The scales that referred to self-efficacy and expectancy-value beliefs were administered at the beginning of the course, while student satisfaction and achievement were measured at the end of the course. The data analysis was conducted by structural equation modeling (SEM). The results revealed that students' expectancy-value beliefs (Subject value, Process expectancy, Achievement expectancy, Cost expectancy) played a mediator role between academic self-efficacy and the achievement/satisfaction relationship. These results provided empirical evidence to better understand the mechanism that mediates self-efficacy–achievement and efficacy–course satisfaction relationships. The implications of these findings for teaching and learning in secondary education are discussed.

Introduction

Based on a socio-cognitive perspective of motivation, the main purpose of this study is to integrate self-efficacy and expectancy-value beliefs into predicting students' outcomes at secondary schools. This has barely been studied in previous research and sometimes with contradictory results.

Self-efficacy is a key personal variable of Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) Bandura's (1986) , defined as “an individual's belief in his or her own ability to organize and implement action to produce the desired achievements and results” ( Bandura, 1997 , p. 3). Educational researchers have paid plenty of attention to this construct (see Michaelides, 2008 , for a review). Prior studies have provided strong evidence that self-efficacy is a positive predictor of performance outcomes in different subjects ( Schunk et al., 2008 ; Usher and Pajares, 2008 ). For instance, Usher and Pajares ( 2008 , p. 751) argued that self-efficacy “predicts students' academic achievement across academic areas and levels.” Despite there being considerable evidence to support the direct effects of self-efficacy beliefs on academic achievement, studies that have explored the motivational mechanism which mediates self-efficacy–achievement relationship are scarce, and are necessary to understand how and why self-efficacy affects students' academic achievement, and will allow instructional actions and programs to improve academic achievement to be designed. One of the most solid proposals that integrate these variables is the social cognitive Expectancy-Value Model (E-VM) of achievement motivation, created by Eccles and her colleagues ( Eccles et al., 1983 ; Wigfield and Eccles, 1992 , Usher and Pajares (2000) based on Atkinson's (1964) expectancy-value model. This complex model includes multiple connections and components that can be classified into three main blocks/categories of variables, arranged in the following sequential order: social world, cognitive processes, and motivational beliefs. All these blocks of variables act directly or indirectly as predictors of students' achievement behavior, persistence, and choice. Centered on motivational beliefs, this model assumes that; first, expectancies for success (achievement expectancy is considered a component of expectancy for success) and subjective task values are directly related to achievement, task choices and persistence; and second, expectancies and task value are assumed to be influenced by individuals' goals and self-schemata. Self-efficacy or personal beliefs of competence is/are considered a salient aspect of self-schemata. Another model that shares similarities with E-VM is the Educational Situation Quality Model ( Doménech, 2006 , 2011 , 2012 , 2013 ; Doménech-Betoret et al., 2014 ; MOCSE is the acronym in Spanish) because: (a) both models are rooted in the social cognitive perspective of motivation; (b) they emphasize the important role that expectancy-value variables play in predicting students outcomes; (c) self-beliefs constructs (e.g., self-efficacy, self-concept, self-esteem, self-confidence, etc.) are considered important antecedents of expectancy-value variables.

Based on the aforementioned theoretical frameworks, the purpose of this study is to test the validity of a structural model by integrating self-efficacy (adolescent students' self-belief) and expectancy and value constructs into predicting and explaining academic achievement and course satisfaction at secondary school. To examine how these motivational beliefs are related and affect such important students outcomes, they are important to not only design actions and programs to improve teacher effectiveness and students' academic results, but to also contribute to clarify the relationship between self-efficacy and expectancy-value variables in predicting students outcomes, whose results available to date are limited and sometimes contradictory ( Williams, 2010 ).

The term “outcomes” may refer to cognitive and emotional variables. Regarding cognitive variables, learning achievements are considered the most important. As regards emotional variables, satisfaction with a course is an important outcome since it influences students' decisions to continue with or drop out of a course ( Levy, 2007 ). Satisfaction is also an important requirement for successful learning ( Sinclaire, 2014 ). The majority of the considered students' outcomes have to do with cognitive variables such as academic achievement (e.g., grades, test scores, etc.) or learning strategies. In the current study we have decided to include, besides academic achievement, an emotional dependent variable that has been less studied by authors in this tradition, such as, course satisfaction. Academic achievement and course satisfaction are considered two complementary learning outcome as the two face of the same coin. Teachers are interested in knowing not only if their student's progress, but also if they are satisfied with the T–L process followed. Both constructs are important indicators of the quality of the teaching-learning (T–L) process. Therefore, we believe that it would be interesting to test if the selected motivational variables differed in predicting and explaining both academic achievement and students' course satisfaction.

Regarding the relationship between self-efficacy and student satisfaction, Pajares and Schunk (2001) stated that a strong sense of efficacy enhances human well-being; for instance, self-efficacy beliefs influence the amount of stress and anxiety that people experience as they engage in an activity ( Pajares and Miller, 1994 ), and probably when students engage in a course. Self-efficacy also predicts course satisfaction in traditional face-to face classrooms ( Bandura, 1997 ). Although there is empirical evidence to support the positive effects of self-efficacy beliefs on students' well-being and course satisfaction ( DeWitz and Walsh, 2002 ), the motivational mechanisms that mediate the self-efficacy–students satisfaction relationship is still a problem to be solved. Very few studies have centered on examining the mechanism that mediates the self-efficacy–students' course satisfaction relationship, and are necessary to understand how and why self-efficacy affects students' course satisfaction. These findings could provide important clues to promote student satisfaction. Student satisfaction is related to improved academic performance and the decision to take additional classes ( Booker and Rebman, 2005 ). Moreover, satisfaction at school is fundamental for the judgments that students make of their own general well-being ( Cummins and Tomyn, 2011 ).

Students' Expectancy-Value Beliefs

The Expectancy-value theory is grounded in the social cognitive perspective of motivation. Psychologists in this tradition argue that individuals' choice, persistence, and vigor expended in performance can be predicted and explained basically by expectations of achievement and the value attributed to a task; i.e., by their beliefs about how well they will do in the task and the extent to which they value the task ( Atkinson, 1957 ; Wigfield and Eccles, 1992 ; Wigfield, 1994 ). Apart from the components noted above, some theorists from this tradition have introduced a third construct related to the feelings experienced by students when they do a task ( Pintrich and De Groot, 1990 ). We name this third construct “process expectancy.” In the course/subject matter context, we understood process expectancy to be the positive feelings that students expect to experience in their interaction with their teacher during the course (How will I feel studying this subject?). Indeed experience tells us that no-one starts something that is not worthwhile or when expectations of success are very poor because completing the task in such circumstances is considered a waste of time. Finally, nobody starts a task if they do not expect be feel well during the performance process. Hence these beliefs are considered three important indicators of students' motivation ( Pintrich and De Groot, 1990 ), which specify some underlying motivational mechanisms that lead to the initiation and maintenance of action ( Pintrich and Schunk, 1996 ). Centered on a course-subject and based on the above arguments, we herein used three types of beliefs that can make adolescent students decide on striving to learn a subject or not: (a) the subject value (What value does this subject have for me?), (b) the achievement expectancy (Will I be able to pass this subject?), and (c) process expectancy (How will I feel studying this subject?).

The modern Expectancy-value theory ( Eccles and Wigfield, 2002 ; Eccles, 2009 ) distinguishes four task-value components: attainment value, intrinsic value, utility value and cost. For the present study, which centered on a course subject, we used extrinsic value (which encompasses utility, importance, and interestingness) and cost-benefit components to assess the subject matter value. Eccles and Wigfield (2002) identified cost as a critical component of value, which was conceptualized as a negative determinant in engaging a task due, for instance, to performance anxiety and fear of failure, and to the amount of effort needed to succeed ( Eccles and Wigfield, 2002 ). However, when we centered on a course, we understood that being involved in a specific subject depends not only on the time and effort invested, but also on the benefits (e.g., in terms of results, reinforcements, enjoyment, etc.) that students can obtain. In short, the subject value items employed in this work refer to: (a) the extrinsic subject value, i.e., the perceived utility, importance, and interestingness of the subject (What value does this subject have for me?); (b) the expected cost-benefit relationship to pass the subject (Will it be worth the time and effort that I will have to invest to pass the subject?).

Students' expectancy-value beliefs may have been generated before classes began, from previous experiences, or may arise on the first days of class when students meet the teacher and find out about the study syllabus, evaluation requirements, teacher methodology, etc. ( Doménech, 2006 , 2011 , 2012 , 2013 ). This means that these beliefs can be evaluated at the beginning of the course after some days/week of class.

The Mediator Role of Expectancy-Value Beliefs between Self-efficacy and the Achievement/Satisfaction Relationship

Regarding the relationship between self-efficacy and expectancy-value beliefs.

When students face a new academic task, they ask themselves “Can I perform this task?” (self-efficacy) and “Why should I do this task?” (task value). If their answer to the first question is “yes,” they proceed to the next question ( Keskin, 2014 ). This reasoning suggests that self-efficacy is considered a predictor of task value, and not vice versa. Previous studies have demonstrated not only a positive relationship between both constructs ( Bong, 2001 ; Seo and Taherbhai, 2009 ), but also that self-efficacy is a direct predictor of task value ( Kozanitis et al., 2007 ; Azar et al., 2010 ; Keskin, 2014 ).

Prior research has also revealed significant and substantial direct effects of students' self-efficacy on academic expectations ( Chemers et al., 2001 ; Lent et al., 2008 ). According to these authors, students with high self-efficacy have greater academic expectations and display better academic performance that with low self-efficacy. These findings are consistent with what Bandura's postulated Bandura's (1997) when he argued that self-efficacy is causally prior to outcome expectancy as the results that individuals anticipate depend mainly on their judgments of how well they would be able to perform in a given situation ( Bandura, 1997 ). Therefore, it is assumed that self-efficacy (defined as the perceived capability to perform a given behavior) causally influences expected outcomes of behavior, but not vice versa.

In short, as regards the relationship between self-efficacy and the expectancy-value variables, the above-described findings support the notion that competence beliefs may drive students' expectations and task/subject values in the school context. However, more studies are needed to understand the connections between students' self-beliefs (e.g., self-efficacy, self-concept, self-esteem, etc.) and expectancy-value variables.

Regarding the Relationship between Expectancy-Value Beliefs and Achievement

Prior research has provided empirical evidence which indicates that expectancies and task-values are related to academic choices and achievement in specific domains, such as mathematics ( Marsh and Yeung, 1997 ; Spinath et al., 2004 ) and language arts ( Spinath et al., 2004 ). Recent cross-sectional and longitudinal studies have found that expectancy beliefs strongly influence achievement, whereas subject value considerably impacts choice, effort and persistence ( Nagengast et al., 2011 ; Gasco and Villarroel, 2014 ; Guo et al., 2015 ).

Regarding the Relationship between Expectancy-Value Beliefs and Satisfaction

Less is known about how students' expectancy-value beliefs relate to emotional outcomes, such as student satisfaction. Despite the findings being limited, they seem to support that satisfaction is well explained by task value ( Artino, 2008 ; Diep et al., 2016 ) and by grade expectancies ( Svanum and Aigner, 2011 ). Nonetheless, most authors highlight the teacher role and teacher–student interaction ( Wu et al., 2010 ) in relation to instructional and emotional supports as the main responsible factors of students' course satisfaction. Accordingly, process expectations, specifically related to the feelings that student experience during their interaction with the teacher, may play the most salient role to explain students' satisfaction. However, the process expectation formed by students can be influenced, in turn, by self-efficacy beliefs. Students with strong self-efficacy beliefs visualize success scenarios, which provide supportive resources, and guidance for performance ( Bandura, 1993 ). As a result, these students tend to experience more satisfaction with the teaching process than the students with low self-efficacy.

Finally, taken all de variables simultaneously, structural models tested in previous studies, based on the expectancy-value theory, provide additional and important evidence to support the mediator role played by motivational expectancy-value variables in the relationship between students' self-beliefs (e.g., self-efficacy, self-concept, self-esteem, etc.) and students outcomes. For example, the study conducted by Doménech-Betoret et al. (2014) in the university context revealed that students' academic self-efficacy had a significant and direct effect on achievement expectations, enjoyable learning expectations and expected dedication (cost) and, in turn, achievement expectation had a significant and direct effect on avoidance strategies (students' outcomes). In addition, subject value had a significant and direct effect on avoidance strategies (students' outcomes). In a similar vein, the study conducted by Bong et al. (2012) in the school context found that the task value and test anxiety significantly mediated the relationships of self-efficacy to achievement.

Based on the aforementioned empirical evidence, it is plausible to assume that the motivators beliefs which derive from the Expectancy-value theory may mediate the relationship between self-efficacy and learning outcomes; e.g., academic achievement and student satisfaction.

Objectives and Hypotheses

According to the aforementioned rationale, the main aim of this study was to examine if the motivational beliefs derived from the Expectancy-value theory play a mediator role between academic self-efficacy and learning outcomes (achievement and satisfaction). At the same time, another aim was to identify some of the motivational processes through which students' academic self-efficacy affects student achievement and satisfaction (see Figure 1 ). Accordingly, we hypothesized that expectancy-value beliefs would have a direct effect on academic achievement and satisfaction, whereas academic self-efficacy would have an indirect effect on academic achievement and satisfaction through expectancy-value variables. In other words, we predicted that expectancy-value variables would play a mediator role between self-efficacy and achievement (H1), and between self-efficacy and satisfaction (H2). The hypothesized connections were addressed and tested by the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) procedure with the EQS program ( Bentler, 2006 ). Self-efficacy and expectancy-value variables were all measured in the first academic term after some weeks of class, and student achievement and satisfaction were all measured in the third and last terms of the course. This study can provide new data to improve the motivational theories that integrate self-efficacy, expectancy, and value constructs in the educational setting context, focused on a subject matter as a unit of analysis. It may also help identify the motivational connections that mediate between academic self-efficacy and students' achievement/satisfaction. Important implications for educational practice may derive from these findings since they can provide valuable information to design instructional actions and programs that can improve student achievement and satisfaction. Student achievement and satisfaction are two of the most important learning outcomes, and are also considered key indicators of education quality.

www.frontiersin.org

Figure 1 . Grafical representation of the study. *Underlying Motivational Mechanisms (UMM) are partially operationalized by the following questions: What value does this subject have for me?, How much time and effort will I invest to pass the subject?, Will I be successful in this subject?, and How will I feel studying this subject?.

Materials and Methods

Participants and procedure.

The sample consisted of 797 Spanish secondary education students from 36 classes with different subjects, of whom 404 were male (50.7%) and 393 were female (49.3%), and they were aged between 12 and 17 years. Most of their teachers ( N = 23, 63.88%) also participated in the study, of whom 11 were males (average experience = 29 years) and 12 were females (average experience = 32 years). About 80% of the participating students were Spanish, while the parents of the rest had come from other counties (the majority from Romania, Ecuador, and Morocco) to Spain as emigrants some years ago. One private and two state secondary schools located in east Spain took part in this study, which was carried out at the first four levels of compulsory secondary education: 1st ESO (12–13 years old), 2nd ESO (13–14 years old), 3rd ESO (14–15 years old), and 4th ESO (16–17 years old; ESO is the Spanish acronym for Educación Secundaria Obligatoria—Compulsory Secondary Education). Table 1 displays sample distribution according to levels of education and centers. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Regional Valencian Government, Spain. Consent for students to participate was required from students' parents or legal tutors. Confidentiality and personal data protection were guaranteed in accordance with current Spanish law.

www.frontiersin.org

Table 1 . Characteristics and sample distribution according to courses and centers.

The scales used to measure the variables considered herein have been reviewed and refined in previous studies ( Doménech, 2006 , 2012 , 2013 ; Doménech-Betoret et al., 2014 ). As most had been designed for university students, they had to be adapted to secondary education in order to use them herein. The scales that referred to self-efficacy and expectancy-value beliefs were administered at time 1 (halfway through the first term), and student satisfaction and achievement were measured at time 2 (halfway through the third term). See Table 2 for item examples.

www.frontiersin.org

Table 2 . Summary of the factor analysis, internal consistency and item example of the scales.

Students' General Academic Self-Efficacy Scale (25 Items, α = 0.86)

This scale is based on the original scales created by Bandura (1990) and by Pastorelli et al. (2001) . This scale was used to assess students' self-perception of how competent they were in the academic field. Students indicated their level of agreement within the 1 (very bad) to 4 (very good) range.

Expectancy-Value Scale (13 Items, α = 0.78)

This scale comprises 13 items and was designed to measure expectancy-value constructs at the beginning of the teaching-learning process. It was structured and designed according to the Motivational Theory proposed by Pintrich (1989) and Pintrich and De Groot (1990) . Students indicated their level of agreement on a 5-point Likert scale within the 1 (I am absolutely unconvinced) to 5 (I am absolutely convinced) range.

Satisfaction of the Teaching Process Scale (5 Items, α = 0.81)

The original scale was designed by Doménech (2011 , 2012) to assess university students' satisfaction with the teaching process followed in the classroom for a specific subject matter. The scale used herein was composed of five items and is a short version of the original teaching process scale adapted to secondary education. Students indicated their level of satisfaction with the teaching process, and opinions were viewed on a 4-point Likert scale within the 1 (unsatisfied) to 5 (very satisfy) range. Finally, student achievement was measured with the marks obtained by students for the first and second academic terms. The mark expected for the third term was also required. Achievement scores ranged from 1 (minimum) to 10 (maximum).

Statistical Analyses

The hypothesized connections were tested by the SEM procedure. The ML and ML robust method of estimation (if the assumption of multivariate normal distribution was violated), developed by Satorra and Bentler (1988 , 1994) , was used with the EQS program ( Bentler, 2006 ) to calculate the fit indices of the hypothesized models. Since the Chi-square test is sensitive to sample size, using relative fit indices like CFI, the NNFI, and RMSEA is highly recommended ( Bentler, 1990 ). Values below 0.05 for RMSEA indicate a good fit, whereas values up to 0.08 denote an unacceptable fit ( Browne and Cudeck, 1993 ). NNFI- and CFI-values above 0.90 ( Hoyle, 1995 ), or even 0.95 ( Hu and Bentler, 1999 ), were fixed as the cutting-off point.

Validity of the Measurement Model of Latent Variables

Hypothesized covariance structure models represent only approaches of reality because the obtained indices may be driven by the sample characteristics on which the model was tested ( Cudeck and Browne, 1983 ). One approach to mitigate this limitation is to employ the cross-validation strategy ( Byrne, 2012 ). To apply this strategy, the total sample ( N = 797) was randomly split into two equivalent subsamples (the calibration sample and the validation sample), following the recommendations of Cudeck and Browne (1983) . First, with subsample 1 ( n = 399), a separate explorative factor analysis (EFA), using the principal component method with varimax rotation, was conducted on all the scales to estimate their factorial structure. Second, by taking the factors extracted in the EFA as the observational variables, a separate confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed with subsample 2 ( n = 398) to test the goodness of fit and stability of the measurement models of these scales. These two-handed factorial analyses (exploratory and confirmatory) approach provide strong evidence for the reliability of the factors used as latent variables, and improve the validity of the measurement model ( Cudeck and Browne, 1983 ). Finally, the total sample ( N = 797) was then used to examine the structural model; i.e., the relationships among the latent variables (see Table 2 for details). When data analyses were performed, the initial sample slightly reduced because 23 students did not complete the entire scales. Missing values were not calculated given the large number of participants.

Students' General Academic Self-Efficacy Scale (25 Items)

Exploratory Factor Analysis (Sample 1). Seven factors that corresponded to the seven academic skills included on the scale were extracted, which accounted for 62.17% of total variance. Cronbach's alpha values ranged between 0.82 (maximum) and 0.61 (minimum).

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (Sample 2). The fit indices values obtained using the ML (χ 2 = 573.459; p = 0.000, d.f . = 254; χ 2 / d.f . = 2.257; NFI = 0.831; NNFI = 0.878; CFI = 0.897; GFI = 0.892; AGFI = 0.861; RMSEA = 0.056) and ML Robust (Satorra-Bentler scaled χ 2 = 478.366; p = 0.000, d.f . = 254; χ 2 / d.f . = 1.883; NFI = 0.823; NNFI = 0.890; CFI = 0.907; IFI = 0.909; MFI = 0.754; RMSEA = 0.047) estimation methods indicated that the model fitted the data.

Expectancy-Value Scale (13 Items)

Exploratory Factor Analysis (Sample 1). Four factors, which corresponded to the four scale constructs, were extracted, and accounted for 77.06% of total variance. Cronbach's alpha values ranged between 0.90 (maximum) and 0.79 (minimum).

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (Sample 2). The fit indices values obtained using the ML (χ 2 = 136.238; p = 0.000, d.f . = 94; χ 2 / d.f . = 1.449; NFI = 0.963; NNFI = 0.985; CFI = 0.988; GFI = 0.960; AGFI = 0.942; RMSEA = 0.034) and ML Robust (Satorra-Bentler scaled χ 2 = 117.663; p = 0.000, d.f . = 94; χ 2 / d.f . = 1.251; NFI = 0.963; NNFI = 0.990; CFI = 0.992; IFI = 0.992; MFI = 0.971; RMSEA = 0.025) estimation methods indicated that the model fitted the data.

Satisfaction with the Teaching Process Scale (5 Items)

Exploratory Factor Analysis (Sample 1). One factor referred to satisfaction with the teaching process (α = 0.81), and was extracted and accounted for 56.05% of total variance. The confirmatory factorial analysis (Sample 2) was not applicable because only one factor was extracted.

Procedure for Testing Mediation

The structural equation analysis was carried out with the whole sample to firstly test the mediation role of the expectancy-value beliefs between the self-efficacy–achievement relationship, and secondly the mediation role of the expectancy-value beliefs between the self-efficacy–satisfaction relationship. The procedure followed to test the mediation effect of the expectancy-value beliefs between self-efficacy and achievement, and also between self-efficacy and satisfaction, was conducted in two steps: first by testing the significant direct effects of latent variable self-efficacy on latent variables achievement (M1A model) and satisfaction (M1S model); second by testing the mediated role of the latent variable expectancy-value beliefs on the self-efficacy–achievement relationship (M2A), and also on the efficacy–satisfaction relationship (M2S). In this case we considered the direct and indirect effects between self-efficacy and achievement/satisfaction simultaneously.

Testing the Mediation Effect of Expectancy-Value Beliefs between self-Efficacy and Achievement (H1)

The M1A model was first tested (direct effects) for the mediation role of the expectancy-value beliefs between self-efficacy and achievement. The fit indices values obtained by the ML method (χ 2 = 194.52; p = 0.0000, d.f . = 34; NNFI = 0.93; CFI = 0.95; GFI = 0.92; RMSEA = 0.078) and the ML Robust method of estimation (χ 2 = 173.19; p = 0.0000, d.f . = 34; NNFI = 0.93; CFI = 0.95; RMSEA = 0.073) indicated that the model satisfactorily fitted the data. According to the data, academic self-efficacy had a significant effect on achievement. So this prerequisite for mediation to exist was met ( Baron and Kenny, 1986 ).

Next the mediated model M2A was tested. The fit indices values obtained by the ML method (χ 2 = 329.77; p = 0.0000, d.f . = 74; NNFI = 0.92; CFI = 0.94; GFI = 0.94; RMSEA = 0.067) and the ML Robust method of estimation (χ 2 = 293.87; p = 0.0000, d.f . = 74; NNFI = 0.92; CFI = 0.94; RMSEA = 0.062) indicated that the model fitted the data well. According to the data, latent variable academic self-efficacy had a significant effect on expectancy-value beliefs, which, in turn, had a significant effect on achievement. On the contrary, the path between academic self-efficacy and achievement was not significant. See Figure 2 for details.

www.frontiersin.org

Figure 2 . M2A model (direct and indirect effects). Relationship among students' academic self-efficacy, expectancy-value beliefs, and achievement. The structural configuration and standardized coefficients of the model are displayed. *Significant ( p < 0.05), n.s., not significant.

Testing the Mediation Role of the Expectancy-Value Beliefs between the Self-Efficacy–Satisfaction Relationship (H2)

The M1S model was first tested (direct effects) for the mediation role of the expectancy-value beliefs between self-efficacy and satisfaction. The model was optimized when a covariance between two variable errors (E10–E12) from the self-efficacy latent variable was introduced, following the recommendations of the Wald and Lagrange test in the EQS program. Then the model was tested again. The fit indices values obtained by the ML method (χ 2 = 197.88; p = 0.0000, d.f . = 52; NNFI = 0.926; CFI = 0.942; GFI = 0.959; RMSEA = 0.060) and the ML Robust method of estimation (χ 2 = 163.57; p = 0.0000, d.f . = 52; NNFI = 0.931; CFI = 0.946; RMSEA = 0.053) indicated that the model fitted the data well. According to the data, Academic Self-Efficacy had a significant effect on teaching process satisfaction. So this prerequisite for mediation to exist was met ( Baron and Kenny, 1986 ).

Second the mediated model M2S was tested. The model was optimized when a covariance between two variable errors (E10–E12) from the self-efficacy latent variable was introduced, following the recommendations of the Wald and Lagrange test in the EQS program. Then the model was tested again. The fit indices values obtained by the ML method (χ 2 = 399.86; p = 0.0000, d.f . = 100; NNFI = 0.891; CFI = 0.909; GFI = 0.938; RMSEA = 0.062) and the ML Robust method of estimation (χ 2 = 343.17; p = 0.0000, d.f . = 100; NNFI = 0.894; CFI = 0.912; RMSEA = 0.056) indicated that the model fitted the data well. According to the data, the latent variable academic self-efficacy had a significant effect on expectancy-value beliefs which, in turn, had a significant effect on teaching satisfaction. On the contrary, the path between academic self-efficacy and teaching satisfaction was not significant. See Figure 3 for details.

www.frontiersin.org

Figure 3 . M2S model (direct and indirect effects). Relationship among students' academic self-efficacy, expectancy-value beliefs, and teaching process satisfaction. The structural configuration and standardized coefficients of the optimized model are displayed. *Significant ( p < 0.05), n.s., not significant.

The description and fit indices of the tested models are provided in Table 3 , which summarizes the structural equation analyses results.

www.frontiersin.org

Table 3 . Fit indices of the tested models ( N = 797).

Based on a socio-cognitive perspective of motivation, this study examines; first, the mediator role played by expectancy-value beliefs in the relationship between students' academic self-efficacy and student achievement; second, the mediator role played by expectancy-value beliefs in the relationship between students' academic self-efficacy and student satisfaction with the teaching process. Achievement and satisfaction were considered dependent variables in two separate models as indicators of teaching practice quality.

For the mediator role played by the expectancy-value beliefs in the relationship between students' academic self-efficacy and student achievement, and following the recommendation by Baron and Kenny (1986) for testing mediation, the prediction capacity of students' academic self-efficacy on student achievement was examined first by testing the M1A model; second the mediator role played by expectancy-value beliefs in the relationship between students' academic self-efficacy and student achievement was examined by testing the M2A model. According to the M1A model, the structural analyses indicated a direct, positive and significant effect of the latent variable academic self-efficacy on achievement. According to the M2A model, the obtained fit indices supported the hypothesized connections. This means that the expectancy-value beliefs mediated the relationship between students' academic self-efficacy and student achievement. These results indicated that students' academic self-efficacy affects student achievement, but only indirectly; i.e., by fulfilling the latent variable expectancy-value beliefs.

For the mediator role played by expectancy-value beliefs in the relationship between students' academic self-efficacy and student satisfaction with the teaching process, and following the recommendation by Baron and Kenny (1986) for testing mediation, the prediction capacity of students' academic self-efficacy on student satisfaction was examined first by testing the M1S model; second the mediator role played by expectancy-value beliefs in the relationship between students' academic self-efficacy and student satisfaction was examined by testing the M2S model.

In accordance with the M1S model, the structural analyses indicated a positive and significant direct effect of students' academic self-efficacy on the latent variable teaching process. According to the M2S model, the obtained fit indices supported the hypothesized connections. This means that the expectancy-value beliefs mediated the relationship between students' academic self-efficacy and student satisfaction. These results suggested that students' academic self-efficacy affects student satisfaction, but only indirectly; i.e., by fulfilling the latent variable expectancy-value beliefs.

Given the remarkable variance explained in both models (M2A and M2S), it can be stated that general academic self-efficacy has a strong effect on expectancy-value beliefs. These findings indicated that the level of activation and quality of students' expectancy-value beliefs during the first weeks of the teaching-learning process (after some weeks attending class) depended to a great extent on the evaluation that students made of their own academic skills/capabilities (self-beliefs); e.g., study techniques, planning study, team work skills, coping with new technologies, memorization capacity, oral and written communication, and coping with exam situations. In the light of the obtained results, academic self-efficacy can be considered an important internal source of motivation that is capable of activating students' motivation in the first stage of the behavioral process; i.e., academic self-efficacy contributes to a great extent to activate student students' motivation from the first weeks of the teaching-learning process undertaken with a specific subject. Therefore, it is important to take into account students' academic self-efficacy when they face a new educational setting. These findings are similar to others obtained in previous research. Thus, the study conducted by Doménech-Betoret et al. (2014) revealed the key role played by academic self-efficacy in explaining students' expectations (achievement expectations, enjoyable learning expectations, and expected dedication according to the subject value). In a similar vein, the structural model tested by Bong et al. (2012) revealed that self-beliefs (self-efficacy and self-concept) are good predictors of task value.

Expectancy-value beliefs had a direct positive and significant effect on student achievement/satisfaction. These findings suggested that expectancy-value beliefs (Achievement expectations, Value of the subject matter, Process expectations with the teacher, Expected cost to pass the subject), which were evaluated some weeks after the course began, would be capable of satisfactorily explaining and predicting student achievement and their degree of satisfaction with the teaching process followed with a specific subject matter. The observational variables with higher loadings (Achievement expectations, Value of the subject and Satisfaction expectations with the process) on the latent factor expectancy-value beliefs suggested that these motivational variables were the most important predictors of student achievement and satisfaction. These findings fall in line with previous studies that used the variables from the Expectation-value theory ( Guo et al., 2015 ). The structural model tested by these authors evidenced that Math self-concept (construct used to assess students' expectancy of success) and the Math utility value had a significant and direct effect on students' academic achievement and educational aspirations.

All these findings moved in the expected direction. Academic self-efficacy, considered a general domain variable ( Boekaerts, 1999 ), predicted and explained students' specific expectancy-value beliefs in connection with a specific educational setting. In turn, these specific expectancy-value beliefs predicted/explained students' outcomes (academic achievement and satisfaction). These results were coherent with what Bandura postulated when claiming that specific measures of beliefs were more closely related to behavior ( Bandura, 1997 ).

Based on the obtained results, the following conclusions can be drawn:

(a) Expectancy-value beliefs, understood as the anticipatory previsions and forecasts that students make in an attempt to anticipate their actions, emotions and results in a new educational situation, were well measured and operationalized by the four motivational selected factors that derived from the Expectancy-value theory: Value of the subject, achievement expectancy, satisfaction expectancy with the process, and the expected cost to pass the subject.

(b) Students' expectancy-value beliefs, generated/activated during the first weeks of the teaching-learning process, were well explained by the perception or idea that students form about their own basic academic skills. These findings also fall in line with previous studies ( Doménech-Betoret et al., 2014 ).

(c) Four motivational variables, which mediate the relationship between academic self-efficacy and students' achievement/satisfaction, were identified. These findings fall in line with previous studies, which examined the mediator role of motivational variables in the relationship between self-efficacy and achievement ( Bong et al., 2012 ).

(d) These findings shed light to better understand the relationship between self-efficacy and expectancy-value beliefs in predicting students' outcomes in secondary education.

(e) This study allows advances to be made in explaining students' emotional outcomes, such as course satisfaction, which has barely been studied in previous research in the expectancy-value theory context.

(f) Important educational implications can be derived from the socio-cognitive perspective of motivation acquired from the results obtained to improve students' achievement and satisfaction from a preventive point of view.

Educational Implications

Based on the results obtained in this study, the following educational implications can be made:

First, the expectancy-value beliefs generated during the first weeks of the course are capable of predicting student achievement and their satisfaction with the teaching process followed throughout the course. Therefore, we wish to stress the importance of making a diagnostic evaluation at the beginning of the course of secondary students' expectancy-value beliefs in order to: (a) detect possible shortcomings that students may present in relation to students' expectancy-value beliefs formed at the beginning of the course, after some days of class; (b) design an action plan to overcome or improve these shortcomings.

Second, the obtained results provide evidence that general academic self-efficacy is capable of explaining to a great extent the expectancy-value beliefs formed by secondary students about a specific subject some days after the course starts. Therefore teachers should also take it into account at the very beginning of the course. Accordingly, implementing actions and programs at schools is recommended to improve students' academic skills to, in turn, improve academic self-efficacy. These programs should include a variety of components that fall in line with the sources of self-efficacy beliefs proposed by Bandura (1997) in academic contexts. According to Bandura (1997) , self-efficacy beliefs are developed when individuals interpret information from four major sources, such as mastery experience, vicarious experience of observing others, social persuasions that students receive from others, and emotional and psychological states. In the school context, mastery experience refers to the way students interpret and evaluate obtained results, and self-beliefs of competence are revised and created according to these interpretations. Accordingly, teachers should provide instructional scenarios in which students are able to succeed in challenging tasks. Students' judgments of competence are also created by vicarious experience; i.e., by evaluating their capabilities in relation to other students' performance. Another source of self-efficacy is the social persuasions that students receive from others. Accordingly, a supportive message from parents and teachers is important to empower students' self-confidence. Finally, students' self-efficacy is created by their emotional and psychological states as students tend to interpret negative psychological states (stress, anxiety, bad mood, depression, etc.) as evidence for lack of skills, and positive psychological states as indicators of personal competence. Accordingly, promoting students well-being and reducing negative emotional states strengthen students' self-efficacy. For more details about sources of self-efficacy, see the review by Usher and Pajares (2008) . In short, the actions and programs that aim to develop students' self-efficacy should be based on these four sources.

We defend the notion of quality education based on a preventive view. Accordingly, we suggest secondary school teachers taking specific actions on the first days of the T–L process to improve adolescent students' beliefs as regards academic self-efficacy (self-beliefs), achievement expectancy, process expectancy and subject value.

(a) It is important for teachers to strive to transmit the idea that all the students in class are capable of passing the subject matter. This relates with students' psychological need of competence ( Deci and Ryan, 1985 , 2000 ).

(b) From the very beginning of the course, improve students' perception of their own capacity, specifically the general academic skills required to improve progress made at school; e.g., taking actions to bridge some basic gaps in training that some students may still have from former courses, and are necessary to make progress in the subject; or evaluate and recognize the progress made by students since the evaluative feedback that students receive contribute to develop their competence. This point relates with students' psychological need of competence ( Deci and Ryan, 1985 , 2000 ).

(c) Explain to students the value of the subject matter when presenting the subject matter syllabus, and also throughout the course. Inform students about the importance and usefulness of the subject matter (present or future) at the personal, academic and professional levels.

(d) From the very beginning of the course, promote and take care of the teacher–students interpersonal relationship; e.g., show closeness, respect, and empathy with students throughout the course. This relates with students' psychological need of relatedness ( Deci and Ryan, 1985 , 2000 ).

Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research

Although the results obtained herein are satisfactory, some limitations and suggestions for future research should be pointed out.

First, the results were obtained from schools located in a specific socio-cultural context. Thus, replicating this study in other educational and cultural contexts is recommended to generalize the findings.

Second, extending the tested model should be considered first by introducing other types of self-efficacy, such as metacognitive self-efficacy ( Moores et al., 2006 ) or emotion regulation self-efficacy ( Gross and John, 2003 ); second by including other motivational variables as mediators. Regarding the motivational process, Bandura (1986) distinguished three types of cognitive motivators: (a) causal attributions; (b) outcomes expectations; (c) goals, whose corresponding theories are Attribution theory, Expectancy-value theory, and Goal theory. Accordingly, including new variables as mediators in future research, such as, goal orientation ( Pintrich, 2000 ) or achievement goals, would be interesting ( Liem et al., 2008 ).

Third, although academic self-efficacy and expectancy-value beliefs were measured in the same data collection wave, we provide enough evidence and theoretical support to consider general academic self-efficacy as an antecedent of the students' expectancy-value belief generated in the classroom context.

Fourth, according to Wigfield and Cambria (2010) , most of the measures used by researchers to assess motivational beliefs are student self-report measures. However, self-report measures can be problematic, especially for young children or for students who state that school is not important to them. Consequently, we wish to emphasize the importance of combining quantitative and qualitative methods to reduce biases and to obtain more complete information about students' belief.

Ethics Statement

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Ethics Committee of the Regional Government of Valencia, Spain, with written informed consent from all subjects. All subjects gave written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Author Contributions

All authors made substantial contributions to design the work, analysis and interpretation of the data, drafting and revising the work, final approval of the version to be published, and finally agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in insuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any aspects of the work were appropriately investigated and resolved (FD, LA, and AG).

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Artino, A. R. (2008). Motivational beliefs and perceptions of instructional quality: predicting satisfaction with online training. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 24, 260–270. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00258.x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychol. Rev . 64(6 Pt 1), 359–372. doi: 10.1037/h0043445

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Atkinson, J. W. (1964). An Introduction to Motivation . Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.

Google Scholar

Azar, H. K., Lavasani, M. G., Malahmadi, E., and Amani, J. (2010). The role of self- efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning approaches and mathematics achievement. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 5, 942–947. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.214

Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and action: A Social Cognitive Theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1990). “Mechanisms of moral disengagement,” in Origins of Terrorism: Psychologies, Ideologies, Theologies, States of mind , ed W. Reich (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 161–191.

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educ. Psychol. 28, 117–148. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control . New York, NY: Freeman.

Baron, R. M., and Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator mediator variable distinction in social psychology research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51, 1173–1182. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

Bentler, P. M. (1990). Fit indexes, langrage multipliers, constraint changes and incomplete data in structural models. Multivariate Behav. Res. 25, 163–172. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_3

Bentler, P. M. (2006). EQS 6 Structural Equations Program Manual . Ecino, CA: Multivarite Sotware Inc.

Boekaerts, M. (1999). Motivated learning: studying student situation transactional units. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 14, 41–55. doi: 10.1007/BF03173110

Bong, M. (2001). Between- and within-domain relations of academic motivation among middle and high school students: self-efficacy, task-value, and achievement goals. J. Educ. Psychol. 93, 23–34. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.23

Bong, M., Cho, C., Ahn, H. S., and Kim, H. J. (2012). Comparison of self-beliefs for predicting student motivation and achievement. J. Educ. Res. 105, 336–352. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2011.627401

Booker, Q. E., and Rebman, C. E. (2005). E-Student retention: factors affecting customer loyalty for online program success. Issues Inform. Syst. 6, 183–189.

Browne, M. W., and Cudeck, R. (1993). “Alternative ways of assessing model fit,” in Testing Structural Equation Models , eds K. A. Bollen and J. S. Long (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage), 136–162.

Byrne, B. (2012). Structural Equation Modeling with Mplus. Basic Concepts, Apllications and Programing . New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.

Chemers, M. M., Hu, L., and Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and first-year college student performance and adjustment. J. Educ. Psychol. 93, 55–64. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.55

Cudeck, R., and Browne, M. W. (1983). Cross-validation of covariance structures. Multivariate Behav. Res. 18, 147–167. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr1802_2

Cummins, R., and Tomyn, A. (2011). The subjective well being of high-school students: validating the personal wellbeing index-school children. Soc. Indic. Res. 101, 405–418. doi: 10.1007/s11205-010-9668-6

Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuit: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol. Inq. 11, 227–268. doi: 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

Deci, E., and Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior . New York, NY: Plenum.

DeWitz, S. J., and Walsh, W. B. (2002). Self-efficacy and college student satisfaction. J. Career Assess. 10, 315–326. doi: 10.1177/10672702010003003

Diep, A. N., Zhu, Ch., Struyven, K., and Blieck, Y. (2016). Who and What contributes to student satisfaction in different blended learning modalities? Br. J. Educ. Technol. 48, 473–489. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12431

Doménech, F. (2006). Testing an instructional model in a university educational setting from the student's perspective. Learn. Instr. 16, 450–466. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.09.005

Doménech, F. (2011). Evaluar e Investigar en la Situación Educativa Universitaria. Un Nuevo Enfoque Desde el Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior. [Evaluate and Investigate in the University Educational Setting. A New Approach from the Higher European Area]. Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I, Universitas. 34.

Doménech, F. (2012). Psicología Educativa: Su Aplicación al Contexto de la Clase [Educational Psychology: its Application in the Classroom Context] , Vol. 13. Castellón: Publicaciones de la Universitat Jaume I. Col·lecció Psique.

Doménech, F. (2013). An instructional model for guiding reflection and research in the classroom: the educational situation quality model. Electron. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 11, 239–260.

Doménech-Betoret, F., Gómez-Artiga, A., and Lloret-Segura, S. (2014). Personal variables, motivation and avoidance learning strategies in undergraduate students. Learn. Individ. Differ. 35, 122–129. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2014.06.007

Eccles, J. (2009). Who am i and what am i going to do with my life? Personal and collective identities as motivators of action. Educ. Psychol. 44, 78–89. doi: 10.1080/00461520902832368

Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., et al. (1983). “Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors,” in Achievement and Achievement Motivation , ed J. T. Spence (San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman) 75–146.

Eccles, J. S., and Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 53, 109–132. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153

Gasco, J., and Villarroel, J. D. (2014). The motivation of secondary school students in mathematical word problem solving. Electron. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 12, 83–106. doi: 10.14204/ejrep.32.13076

Gross, J. J., and John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: implications for affect, relationships and well-being. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 85, 348–362. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348

Guo, J., Marsh, H. W., Parker, P. D., Morin, A. J. S., and Yeung, A. S. (2015). Achievement, motivation, and educational choices: a longitudinal study of expectancy and value using a multiplicative perspective. Dev. Psychol. 51, 1163–1176. doi: 10.1037/a0039440

Hoyle, R. H. (1995). Structural Equation Modeling . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hu, L., and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: coventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118

Keskin, H. K. (2014). A path analysis of metacognitive strategies in reading, self-efficacy and task value. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Educ. 4, 798–808.

Kozanitis, A., Desbiens, J.-F., and Chouinard, R. (2007). Perception of teacher support and reaction towards questioning: its relation to instrumental help-seeking and motivation to learn. Int. J. Teach. Learn. High. Educ. 19, 238–250.

Lent, R. W., Sheu, H. B., Singley, D., Schmidt, J. A., Schmidt, L. C., and Gloster, C. S. (2008). Longitudinal relations of self-efficacy to outcome expectations, interests, and major choice goals in engineering students. J. Vocat. Behav. 73, 328–335. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2008.07.005

Levy, Y. (2007). Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses. Comput. Educ. 48, 185–204. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2004.12.004

Liem, A. D., Lau, S., and Nie, Y. (2008). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning strategies, task disengagement, peer relationship, and achievement outcome. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 33, 486–512. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.08.001

Marsh, H. W., and Yeung, A. S. (1997). Causal effects of academic self-concept on academic achievement: structural equation models of longitudinal data. J. Educ. Psychol. 89, 41–54. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.89.1.41

Michaelides, M. P. (2008). Emerging themes from early research on self-efficacy beliefs in school mathematics. Electron. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 6, 219–234.

Moores, T. T., Chang, J. C., and Smith, D. K. (2006). Clarifying the role of self-efficacy and metacognition as indicators of learning: construct development and test. Database Adv. Inform. Syst. 37, 125–132. doi: 10.1145/1161345.1161360

Nagengast, B., Marsh, H. W., Scalas, L. F., Xu, M. K., Hau, K. T., and Trautwein, U. (2011). Who took the “x” out of expectancy-value theory? A psychological mystery, a substantive-methodological synergy, and a cross-national generalization. Psychol. Sci. 22, 1058–1066. doi: 10.1177/0956797611415540

Pajares, F., and Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem solving: a path analysis. J. Educ. Psychol. 86:193. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.86.2.193

Pajares, F., and Schunk, D. H. (2001). “Self-beliefs and school success: self-efficacy, selfconcept, and school achievement,” in Perception , eds R. Riding and S. Rayner (London: Ablex Publishing), 239–266.

Pastorelli, C., Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Rola, J., Rozsa, S., and Bandura, A. (2001). The structure of children's perceived self-efficacy: a cross-national study. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 17, 87–97. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759.17.2.87

Pintrich, P. L., and Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in Education: Theory, Research, and Applications . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Pintrich, P. R. (1989). “The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom,” in Advances in Motivation and Achievement , Vol. 6, eds C. En Ames and M. L. Maher (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press), 117–160.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000). “The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning,” in Handbook of Self-regulation , eds M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, and M. Zeidner (San Diego, CA: Academic Press), 452–502.

Pintrich, P. R., and De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom performance. J. Educ. Psychol. 82, 33–40. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33

Satorra, A., and Bentler, P. M. (1988). “Scaling corrections for chi-square statistics in covariance structure analysis. ASA 1988,” in Proceedings of the Business and Economic Statistics, Section , (Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association), 308–313.

Satorra, A., and Bentler, P. M. (1994). “Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis,” in Latent variables analysis: Applications for Developmental Research , eds A. von Eye and C. C. Clogg (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage), 399–419.

Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., and Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in Education: Theory, Research and Applications, 3rd Edn. , Upper saddle River, NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.

Seo, D. C., and Taherbhai, H. (2009). Motivational beliefs and cognitive processes in mathematics achievement, analyzed in the context of cultural differences: a Korean elementary school example. Asia Pac. Educ. Rev. 10, 193–203. doi: 10.1007/s12564-009-9017-0

Sinclaire, J. K. (2014). An empirical investigation of student satisfaction with college courses. Res. High. Educ. J. 22, 1–21.

Spinath, B., Spinath, F. M., Harlaar, N., and Plomin, R. (2004). Predicting school achievement from general cognitive ability, self-perceived ability, and intrinsic value. Intelligence 34, 363–374. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2005.11.004

Svanum, S., and Aigner, C. (2011). The influences of course effort, mastery and performance goals, grade expectancies, and earned course grades on student ratings of course satisfaction. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 81, 667–679. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.2010.02011.x

Usher, E. L., and Pajares, F. (2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: critical review of the literature and future directions. Rev. Educ. Res. 78, 751–796. doi: 10.3102/0034654308321456

Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: a developmental perspective. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 6, 49–78. doi: 10.1007/BF02209024

Wigfield, A., and Cambria, J. (2010). Students' achievement values, goal orientations, and interest: definitions, development, and relations to achievement outcomes. Dev. Rev. 30, 1–35. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2009.12.001

Wigfield, A., and Eccles, J. S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: a theoretical analysis. Dev. Rev. 12, 265–310. doi: 10.1016/0273-2297(92)90011-P

Wigfield, A., and Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25, 68–81. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1015

Williams, D. M. (2010). Outcome expectancy and self-efficacy: theoretical implications of an unresolved contradiction. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 14, 417–425. doi: 10.1177/1088868310368802

Wu, H., Tennyson, R. D., and Hsia, T. (2010). A study of of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment. Comput. Educ. 55, 155–164. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.12.012

Keywords: self-efficacy, expectancy-value theory, expectancy beliefs, value beliefs, academic achievement, student satisfaction

Citation: Doménech-Betoret F, Abellán-Roselló L and Gómez-Artiga A (2017) Self-Efficacy, Satisfaction, and Academic Achievement: The Mediator Role of Students' Expectancy-Value Beliefs. Front. Psychol . 8:1193. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01193

Received: 01 May 2017; Accepted: 30 June 2017; Published: 18 July 2017.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2017 Doménech-Betoret, Abellán-Roselló and Gómez-Artiga. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Fernando Doménech-Betoret, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • J Multidiscip Healthc

Bandura’s Self-Efficacy Model Used to Explore Participants’ Experiences of Health, Lifestyle, and Work After Attending a Vocational Rehabilitation Program with Lifestyle Intervention – A Focus Group Study

Anita dyb linge.

1 Faculty of Social Science and History, Volda University College, Volda, Norway

Stål Kapstø Bjørkly

2 Faculty of Health Sciences and Social Care, Molde University College, Molde, Norway

Chris Jensen

3 Norwegian National Advisory Unit on Occupational Rehabilitation, Rauland, Norway

4 Department of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway

Bente Hasle

We aimed to use the self-efficacy model to examine the participants’ experience, attitudes, and viewpoints regarding the association between work, health and lifestyle factors that influence work participation after completing a new one-year multidisciplinary vocational rehabilitation (VR) programme with a lifestyle intervention for people on or at risk of sick leave due to obesity or obesity-related problems.

Materials and Methods

This case study was based on focus group (FG) interviews with 11 previous participants. The interviews were conducted 2 to 4 years after they completed the program, between August and September 2019. The analysis followed Braun and Clarke’s six-phase reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) approach.

The main theme “Work participation enhances quality of life” was prominent and related to mastery experience. Four sub-themes directly and indirectly affect work participation. The first sub-theme is “My attitude to life”, influenced by mastery experiences. Next, “Body size matters”, related to physiological and affective states. “Good physical capacity profit in everyday life” is associated to physiological and affective states, and the last “Support from the surroundings” influenced by vicarious experience and Verbal Persuasion.

This study’s main finding highlights how participants value work participation as a meaningful activity that positively influences their work self-efficacy. Future VR programs should pay attention to interventions focusing on the workplace, cognitive approaches to develop skills for coping strategies, lifestyle change purposing BMI reduction, physical activity, and support from the surroundings.

Clinical Trials

Technical information about the study on Clinical Trials {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT03286374","term_id":"NCT03286374"}} NCT03286374 .

Introduction

People with obesity may have a good quality of life and physical functioning. 1 However, people with obesity experience poorer health-related quality of life (HRQoL) when compared with the non-obese population. 1 Obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 30 kg/m 2 ) is a multifactorial chronic disease associated with severe health complications, functional impairment and lower self-esteem. 2 Causes of obesity result from a combination of genetic, biological, psychological, behavioural, familial, social, cultural, and environmental conditions. 3–5 For many people with obesity, humiliation, stigmatization, discrimination, and bullying may be experienced daily in many areas of their social life, including the workplace. 2 , 6 , 7 Moreover, obesity may also affect work participation through reduced job productivity and physical functioning, 1 , 8 absenteeism from work, and sick leave. 8 , 9 Statistics for the Scandinavian countries indicate that Denmark, reported a yearly 1, 8 million extra days of work absence and close to 1.100 cases of disability pension related to obesity. 10 A study on Swedish women concludes that 10% of the total cost regarding social security are caused by overweight and obesity. 11 A report from OECD through Statistics Norway shows that persons in the age between 50 to 59 with obesity have three times as much work absence than those without. 12 Previously published studies indicate that working people of all ages with obesity may struggle to enter and remain in the workforce, 8 contributing to adverse financial and social consequences, lower self-confidence, a depressed mood, and feelings of isolation. 13 , 14 Further, publications indicate also that weight reduction may improve work ability and work participation. 15–17 To manage health and functional capacity problems and adjust contextual factors, people in Norway can receive help through governmental-funded vocational rehabilitation (VR). 18 , 19 VR aims not to cure illness but to promote work participation despite sickness and health complaints. Return to work (RTW) (ie return, maintain or stay at work) is often the outcome measure and the final goal; however, it explains only a small part of rehabilitation’s complex picture. 14 , 20 For employees, job satisfaction, mental function and work-home balance are important outcomes of the RTW process. 21 Previous research has indicated that people attending VR programmes may enhance work ability and reduce sick leave. 15 , 22 , 23

In Norway, traditional VR programmes tend to last no more than 4 weeks and occasionally up to 12 weeks. 18 This short duration contrasts sharply with the time people with obesity need to make lifestyle changes, which preferably would be more than 6 months. 24 Therefore, in 2015, a new, temporary, multidisciplinary VR programme for people on or at risk of sick leave due to obesity or obesity-related problems, for example as diabetes, muscle and skeletal disorders, hypertension and mental health problems was established at a specialised rehabilitation centre, Muritunet, in Norway. The major differences between the traditional and the new VR program are the length and the behavioural- and dietary intervention. The inpatient VR programme was established with several follow-ups over an entire year to enable the participants to work with processes contributing to health benefits and increased RTW ( Figure 1 ).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is JMDH-14-3533-g0001.jpg

A schematic overview above the vocational rehabilitation program’s In- and Outpatient stays with lifestyle intervention.

The multidisciplinary team engaged in the rehabilitation program comprised a labour consultant, health care professionals and a sports educator; they all had complementary roles and collaborated to assess and treat the participants. Each participant developed a plan with goals for work activity, diet, physical activity, and coping strategies for the rehabilitation period. The rehabilitation program consisted of practical and theoretical intervention components in groups and individually. During the 4-week inpatient stay, the participants had, on average 17 hours of individual consultations with a labour consultant, medical doctor, dieticians, physiotherapist, psychiatrist, or nurse, all educated in Motivational interviewing. 25 They also had 48 hours of group activity and lectures divided as follows: 14 hours of cognitive behaviour theory and practice, 20 hours of physical activity, 9.5 hours of education on food, 2.5 hours of work-related education, and 2 hours of lectures about obesity. After the four weeks of inpatient stay, the participants received an additional 4 hours of individual consulting, 6 hours of cognitive behaviour therapy and practice, 2 hours of food education and 4 hours of physical activity aiming to further support lifestyle change.

Self-Efficacy

The new VR programme lasted longer, had dietary and behavioural interventions, and was based on cognitive behaviour therapy principles to enhance work self-efficacy and lifestyle change. Self-efficacy is a dynamic construct that explains the development of motivation and coping strategies and may be a useful approach for understanding the self-management aspects of RTW and lifestyle change. 14 , 26 Self-efficacy is defined as “belief in one’s abilities to organise and execute the courses of action required to produce a given attainment”. 27 Self-efficacy is an important cognitive, motivational factor for predicting functional recovery and an individual’s probability of successfully participating in and completing treatment and maintaining appropriate behaviour. 14 , 23 , 27 Self-efficacy belief can vary, often substantially, across different domains of functioning. This implies that an increase of self-efficacy in one domain may be interpreted as a result of increased self-efficacy in other domains. 27

The four sources of self-efficacy are: Mastery Experience, Vicarious Experience, Verbal Persuasion, and Emotional and Physiological states. The first and most important source of increasing self-efficacy is having a direct experience of mastery. The second component is vicarious experiences. This comes from observations of people around us, particularly from persons we consider role models. Verbal persuasion is the third element. Positive communication and feedback from influential persons in our lives, such as family, teachers, and colleagues, can strengthen our self-belief. The last source for improved self-efficacy is emotional and physiological states. These four sources influence each other and can contribute to improving our confidence in our skills. Belief in personal efficacy promotes a key factor of healthy development, 26 and high self-efficacy will generally contribute to better performance. 27 The level of self-efficacy can predict behaviour change and the likelihood of successfully embracing and coping with life. 14 , 27 How people live their lives depends on previous experiences, how they evaluate their abilities concerning the approval of others, how support from others can strengthen their belief to achieve what they seek, and how the emotional state affects the body’s physiological responses. 27 Peoples’ self-efficacy is rooted in a system consisting of individual factors and environmental and social systems. In a group, working together may be essential for achieving collective social goals. 27

Self-efficacy is a good predictor of behaviour and behaviour change. Still, the concept cannot be used as an exhaustive explanation of “the beliefs about whether actions affect outcomes”, 27 further explained as outcome expectancy . Outcomes, for example, BMI loss and work participation in this study, arise from action and depend a lot on an individual’s judgment of how well they will perform in a given situation. Unrealistic high expectancy outcomes can be demoralising in combination with low skills to accomplish tasks and activities. In contrast, high expectancy in combination with good skills can motivate one to a desired behaviour. 27 A mix between self-efficacy and outcome expectancy can contribute to good behavioural outcomes and strengthening emotional abilities. 27

VR with a lifestyle intervention is new and unexplored. Only a few studies have focused on the association between multifactorial lifestyle risk and work ability 20 , 28 and factors that generate work participation for people with obesity. 29 By examining the work dimension’s interpretation, we can explore a more holistic picture of the complexity of obesity and work participation. The participants’ own voices on what they experience as facilitating or inhibiting their lifestyles and work participation are vital for this insight. Therefore, the present study aimed to use the four sources of self-efficacy to examine the participants’ experience, attitudes, and viewpoints regarding the association between work, health and lifestyle factors that influence work participation 2 to 4 years after completing the new VR programme with lifestyle intervention.

Study Design

This qualitative case study was based on focus group (FG) interviews with persons who had attended the new one-year multidisciplinary VR programme. The interviews were conducted between August and September 2019, 2 to 4 years after they completed the VR program. An invitation was given to participants who had achieved weight loss during the VR program and worked part or full-time at the 12-month follow-up. On average, the participants had achieved −11.9 kg weight loss during the VR program, stretching from −17.2 to −6.8 kg. The participants lived in a geographical area nearby each other.

Participants

In total, 18 individuals between 18 and 64 years were telephoned, and 12 orally consented to participate. As well, the participants received a written letter with information about the study (purpose, date, time, and place for the interview). Based on geographical destinations, the participants were divided into three FGs. On the same day as FG interview number two, one male participant could not come. Therefore, the total number of participants reported in this study is 11 ( Table 1 ).

Characteristics of the Participants

Abbreviations : SLB, sick leave benefit; WAA, work assessment allowance; FWP, full work participation.

The study sample included 6 men and 5 women aged 35 to 62 years. At the time of the interview, 2 of the participants were single and 9 married. Eight of the participants worked full-time, 2 were working part-time, and 1 female participant was temporarily on sick leave due to an operation. Seven participants had extended work experience of more than 20 years, and the rest had between 11 to 20 years of work experience. Since attending the VR program, 6 participants had lost or maintained their body weight, and 5 were “going up and down.”

A semi-structured interview guide was developed to capture the participants’ experiences, attitudes, and viewpoints on the association between health, lifestyle, and work participation ( Appendix 1 ). The interviews were based on open-ended questions. The questionnaires were first tested on a selected and consenting individual with a BMI of more than 30 who participated in a lifestyle change program at Muritunet, a specialised rehabilitation centre. This resulted in small changes to the interview guide. Second, in a VR program at Muritunet, two groups of volunteers tested the modified interview guide and, subsequently, the questionnaires were adjusted to ensure validity.

The first and last author in this article conducted all three FGs. Each interview took from 1.5 to 2 hours and was conducted in a suitable meeting room big enough for six persons. The FG interview started with presenting the study’s purpose, group rules, expectations, and the participants’ possibility of clearing up any ambiguities. A short presentation for the members was conducted before introducing topics in the interview. To keep control over the FG interview, the main author controlled the discussion and interaction. The last author kept track of what was taking place, taking notes and contributing with questions and input in the dialogue. 30 After approval from the participants, the interviews were digitally recorded.

After the interviews, the authors summarised the experiences and observations. After each interview, the digital data were reviewed and orthographically transcribed. 31 Each transcript was compared with digital files at least twice.

Reflexive Thematic Data Analysis

The analysis followed Braun and Clarke’s six-phase reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) approach, which involves familiarising data, data coding, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining, and naming themes and producing the report. 31–33 The process was characterised by an exchange of views, creative thinking, sharing, and discussing notes and models between the first and last authors. RTA allows identifying broad themes among the participants’ experiences on what affects their work participation. 34 Analysing data was not a straightforward process but rather a process in which we moved back and forth between the different writing phases.

The RTA process started with familiarising ourselves with the data and identifying essential information relevant to the study’s aim before exchanging opinions. The first and last authors started with a hard copy (paper and pen) method, first separately and then together. The next phase included importing transcript interviews to NVivo version 12 for Windows. This process consisted of an analysis of data which were accompanied by observational and causal notes. 31 In this phase, data “opened up” and provided more profound meaning. An inductive approach contributed to coding the essence of what was interesting, first on hard copy and then in NVivo. NVivo allowed matching the code of the part of the interview to that to which it refers. The data amount was reduced throughout the coding process and briefly organized the interview content into meaningful categories relevant to answering the study aim. 33 Included data described knowledge from the VR program and substantiated participants’ experiences with work participation. Codes in this section provided the building blocks of the analysis. 31 , 33 Data were then sorted into themes, and meaning-based patterns were identified by looking into the codes and their associated extracts. 33 Going back and forth through the data contributed to establishing coherent and distinctive themes, 31 and the themes names were based on the theme’s content, interest, and essence.

Writing “what we did” and “what we found” hopefully provides transparency to aid in understanding the messy process involved in transforming focus group research into a coherent and informative presentation. Quotations in this article of what the participants said demonstrate the findings, give the participants a voice, and demonstrate the interpretative adequacy of the analysis. 31 , 33

One main theme and four sub-themes emerged from the analysis and consisted of information affecting the participants’ self-efficacy concerning work participation. The findings are presented according to the four sources of self-efficacy by Bandura, 27 , 35 a theoretical framework used as a lens for how this study labelled the findings 36 ( Table 2 ).

Overview of Findings and Related Self-Efficacy Source

Due to the modest amount of published literature about factors that generate work participation for people with obesity, the framework of self-efficacy can contribute as a valuable approach for the study context and depth of the topics of work and obesity. 37 The main theme is “Work participation enhances quality of life”, and the four sub-themes are “My attitude to life”, “Body size matters”, “Good physical capacity enhances in everyday life”, and the last, “Support from the surroundings”.

The main and the first sub-theme are presented within the source of mastery experience, and the third and fourth, within the source of physiological and affective states. The last theme is presented with the source vicarious experience and verbal persuasion. The amount of information within these sources highlights how important they are for the participants’ general self-efficacy concerning health, lifestyle, and work participation.

Work Participation Enhances Quality of Life: Mastery Experience

Work participation enhances quality of life was unlike the other themes as it was prominent in all focus groups interviews and, therefore, the main theme. This theme contains information about job satisfaction, facilitated work, good relationship with employers and colleagues, and the consequences of lack of recognition.

Most of the participants had worked many years in the same profession or with the same employer. It struck us how they all were proud of what they do. The participants talked warmly about their devotion and dedication to their jobs. They had important tasks, and one skipper told us:

I love to be in charge, to manoeuvre the boat and to do the job right. That is my quality of life. I love my job, and I’m a sailor. For me, work is a way of life.

One of the women working with children said it is

Nice to get to work, and the kids wrap around my neck. During the periods I have been on sick leave, I miss the social life, to be with the other colleagues and have the possibility to talk to the others.

They stated that “it is important to enjoy the work” and that “a job with well-being compensates for much in life.” Being part of a good team was highlighted for “well-being at work.” One of the women said, “We colleagues kid with each other”. Another woman said: “I need jokes and laughter around me at work. Nonsense gives me a good laugh”. Working together in a team, sharing life experiences, and having fun together was crucial for job satisfaction. These statements were typical for all the participants and were analysed as the core theme of all three focus groups’ interviews. Good communication and relationship with employers and colleagues may support their self-efficacy in interaction with others.

During the interviews, the participants discussed what promotes and inhibits work participation. An employer can make things easier or harder in the workplace.

There is not always need for big changes, but it was helpful when Fridays were celebrated with fruit instead of cake. Not just because of me but in general.

Another employer had organised physical activity and signed up for organised physical activity called “Stikk UT.” The company offered this to all their employees. Some participants had employers who contributed to job satisfaction and a healthy lifestyle as an inclusive practice for all, which supported their work self-efficacy. An attitude like this might help alleviate the stigma individuals who are overweight usually encounter. Sometimes greater accommodations are required, illustrated in the craftsman example where his employer “facilitated that I did not have to travel that much, and I worked less overtime.” Working shifts contributed to a less healthy lifestyle, and some participants had access to modified jobs with the same employer when, as one said, “I got sleeping problems due to the night shift which affected my eating habits and my lifestyle”.

However, not all the participants had good experiences with their employers. One of them found that shift work and “unconventional working hours lead to sleeping problems and anxiety.” One informant experienced a lack of recognition of his health problems and related the following:

After I got on sick leave, my first contact with my employer was after six months. My employer called me one hour before a dialogue meeting with NAV. My problem, I could not sleep due to shift work, became stressed, and my employer did not show any interest in facilitating the work, which affected both my work ability and lifestyle.

Not experiencing support from his employer was understood as a means of exclusion and affected his lifestyle. Not being heard when struggling at work was associated with loss of motivation, work absence and decreased work self-efficacy to exercise control over troublesome situations.

The main theme contains information about what work participation means for the participants and what can be done to maintain work participation. Regardless of which focus group, participants shared information about work participation’s joy and satisfaction, based on their past and present experiences. Even when a workload included heavy physical tasks, as one cleaning lady talked about, her satisfaction in being a part of and having important tasks in a work community was strong: “I love to be at work, it is my family, there is humour and a fantastic place to be”. Her satisfaction did not, however, keep her from adding to the theme of how a large body makes work hard.

The participants emphasised with employers who facilitated working hours and a healthy lifestyle. They conversed positively about employers who served fruit instead of cake, organised or facilitated physical activity during working hours or leisure times, and facilitated and individualised organised working conditions for the workers. Participants highlighted good leaders who promoted a healthy work culture and was a source of well-being and job satisfaction. Having a need for modified work not being accommodated was a factor that led to sick leave and consequent troubling lifestyle change processes.

My Attitudes to Life: Mastery Experiences

The first sub-theme associated with work participation included findings about how participants’ thoughts, feelings, and the ability to conduct tasks and activity successfully affected their lives in general. This sub-theme provides insight into what promotes and inhibits choices related to life in general and work participation.

Besides participation in work, the participants continued working on their lifestyle change process, including weight loss, which might be challenging to achieve and maintain. In all focus group interviews, the topic of “weight cycling,” which describes repeated periods of unhealthy food intake, inactivity and loss of faith and motivation, was recurring. It seems that “weight cycling” greatly impacted the participants’ lives, both in their lifestyles and, equally importantly, in their coping strategies in general. Participants who expected weight cycling managed to recognise and mobilise previously experienced strategies to return to a lifestyle characterised by healthy food, structure in everyday life and positive self-efficacy. Also, they had the strong belief: “I know I can!”, build on previous experiences in combination with high outcome expectancy. Another characteristic was that instead of cutting out food, they replaced unhealthy with healthy food. They maintained a balance between allowing and denying themselves food and sweets, like, for example, one of the women who described one of her coping strategies:

I have learned to eat food, and I taste sweets. I have stopped eating sweets, I taste it. I look forward to tasting and have stopped having a bad conscience about tasting”. She had learned that previous food patterns and feelings about eating decreased her self-efficacy and had now learned a coping strategy which affected her positively.

Three of the informants did not manage to overcome the negative weight cycling and expressed a wish to have “the strength to succeed and stay there.” Previous experience with diets that failed, lack of coping strategies and external factors contributed to failure in their projects. One reported having lost her “motivation on vacation and could not stop the unhealthy lifestyle - there were no future goals.” One of the sailors said that his “loss of faith” was associated with several factors. It was connected to the culture at work with “inappropriate food patterns”, “an inhibitory sports injury, and a new girlfriend. Getting a girlfriend is not good if you want to lose weight [laughter].” In some periods, especially in cases where the lifestyle-change process failed, many of the participants’ felt unsuccessful and withdrew themselves from others, both from work colleagues and in private: “I withdraw myself from others when I fail in my project and am more social when I succeed - my own choice.” It seems that negative strategies among the participants were characterised by no future goals, lower self-efficacy, and a higher sense of failure when they failed in life.

Letting go of a miserable conscience and learning to deal with emotions and messy thoughts was another experience involved in being able to handle the workload and which contributed to increased self-efficacy. One of the women said:

I had messy thoughts all the time both at work and in private. Then I realised that this was not good for me. In the last year, I haven’t had that messy thinking. I have discovered that I still reach the finish line.

This echoed what another woman pointed out:

I have a less lousy conscience now. I have learned not to worry too much. In my group, we talk a lot about eating our emotions. I have become good at putting thoughts and worries away, and then I do not get so scared. I do not dull my fears by eating them up.

Accepting “who you are and what you can do” is the last experience the participants’ highlighted. High expectations recurred as a factor for stress. Two participants in different focus groups both engaged in the theme of being “good enough”. They had changed their attitudes to life in general by not letting their big bodies dominate their thoughts. Both had lost weight and learned from previous thoughts and feelings, redefined and strengthened their self-efficacy, and accepted “who you are and what you can do”. One of the women said that she had “learned that I am good enough”, and these two participants supported other group members that had not succeeded by encouraging them: “One should be happy for the one thing you achieve and not focus on the other things you have not done.”

Body Size Matters: Physiological and Affective States

The second sub-theme contained findings regarding how body size promotes or inhibits work participation. The participants started by explaining why body weight reduction was important for them regarding work participation. Three of the men, mainly sailors, faced the threat of losing their jobs because of their obesity or obesity-related diseases:

We could have lost our medical certificate. We go to the seafarer’s doctor every other year. We struggled with overweight and had problems. We could have lost our jobs if we had not lost weight.

One lorry driver experienced that his doctor “threatened to take my driver license due to my uncontrolled blood sugar; I have diabetes.”

Both men and women experienced how body weight reduction had positive effects regarding work execution. They experienced that body weight reduction contributed to easier job performance. For some, being able to wear normal clothing sizes rather than custom-made work clothing was a relief. These positive effects of body weight reduction contrasted with the experiences of a cleaning lady who gained body weight after the VR programme. She talked openly about how her body size affected her work participation and health:

I have low-back pain, and today, I am attending a treatment program for this problem. I am 50% on sick leave. Walking around with heavy body weight on my stomach is not ideal for my back.

Regardless of body weight reduction, the participants talked about how their body size affected work participation through increased security risk due to safety equipment not being customised for people with obesity. The lorry driver talked about his fear when he was walking on the top of a truck:

When you have a high BMI as I do, I am afraid of the balance. I must balance on the roof of the vehicle, between two low rails. The thin rails to pull up that should hold me on the top will be unsafe if I fall.

Body size affects security at work directly and indirectly because it may also exclude some from participation in fire drills and first aid training. The participants experienced their body size exposed in these situations and found this excessive attention unpleasant. One of the women who had gained weight said:

I did not want to participate. Imagine, getting laid down and being pulled along the floor. You are revealed for how heavy you are…. Also, we had a first aid course at work. We were going to create a situation where I would faint. I did not want to lie down, and others would turn me over in a stable side position.

Another woman in the focus group supported her: “I agree with her. Pulled in a fire blanket… then I would leave.” These stories can describe how self-image is at play at work due to obesity. The participants’ emotional reactions to activities, tasks, and situations due to body size seemed to affect their judgment of their ability to complete tasks in different areas. Low self-images affect self-efficacy and may be a result of how other employees think of people with obesity. Especially among health care workers, the participants experienced stigma, which affected their work participation indirectly and directly:

Often when I go to the medical doctors, they tell me to lose weight and then my problems will be solved. You will not be taken very seriously when you have a big body.

Another example was from a lady working as a nurse:

I have struggled a lot with my hips. The orthopaedic surgeon could give me new hips but recommended that I lose weight for a successful outcome. So now I have fixed them, hip replacements. When I read the description of the operation, it was a revelation that my hip problems were due to a congenital hip defect. It was a relief; this was not just self-inflicted.

Some have also experienced violation from others like the man in this quotation:

I was on the mountain one day, and there was a girl who had sprained her ankle. There were six persons from the Red Cross that carried her down. One group member told me that I should not injure my ankles on the mountain because they could not bear to carry me down.

Besides stigma, one of the women talked about experiences of discrimination due to obesity:

I have experienced that people think I am pregnant because of my stomach. Once, when I was at a job interview, I’m sure that I did not get the position because they thought I was pregnant. The girl who got the position had less education than I. I guess they thought I was pregnant, and then they could not hire me because I was soon going on maternity leave.

One of the men said that he has worked “high up in organisations” and experienced how “people with obesity have been deselected, even though they have had wonderful qualifications.” He concluded: “If you are too obese, you lose respect!”

The participants talked about how body weight reduction improved individual health with normal blood pressure, more stable blood sugar, and increased activity level. These improvements led to their renewing their medical certificates to continue working on Norwegian ships and mobile offshore units and as a lorry driver. Besides health improvements, body weight reductions contributed to relief among three participants regarding their being able to wear workwear in normal sizes and how much easier it was to do their jobs with trouble-free access to difficult places. Without body weight reduction, health complaints maintained and negatively affected work participation. Obesity may contribute to security risks at work because of a lack of safety requirements and of people avoiding exposing themselves to safety training courses. The participants experienced stigma and discrimination both at work and in private from healthcare workers, colleges, and unknown people in their surroundings. Discrimination can be random or, in worst cases, systematic within an organisation. Stigma affected all areas of their lives and affected the participants’ thoughts and feelings. With an underlying tone of seriousness, the participants talked about discrimination and stigma whimsically.

Good Physical Capacity Enhances in Everyday Life: Physiological and Affective States

The third sub-theme contains findings on the physical capacity that enhances participants’ work participation and mental and physical health. Two to four years after they completed the VR, physical capacity and activity seemed to be more important to participants than their body weight reduction. They talked about the physical endurance needed for a functional body and how important this was, like one lady in this quotation said: “Losing body weight was not the most important thing for me. I was not that obese. Getting in better shape to cope with the day was essential for me.” Achieving this goal was described as “liberating”. High physical capacity was experienced as a factor for better mood, greater endurance, and the feeling of confidence. These factors contributed to coping with work demands and in everyday life and building self-efficacy. Mainly, lifestyle changes were kept, despite gained weight for some. One of the young men related:

Always go for a morning walk and maybe once again during the day. Suddenly it becomes “Oh, Saturday I can go for a long walk!” Very nice! Walking has become an activity I want to do and not something I have to do. I have even changed to a new job which contributed to being “paid to be sweaty”.

One of the women experienced that she “lost motivation.” She had gained weight and said it was hard to work:

I get body pain; my body hurts all over. I know that if I’m good at exercising, then I have the strength to carry my body, and then I do not get so much pain. It does not matter if I have high body weight, but whether I have a functional body.

In addition, other participants had experienced that low physical endurance contributed to lower energy level, less social contact with others, and increased health complaints, which, in total, may affect work participation. It seems that low physical endurance and capacity may influence the participants about how they feel and think of themselves.

One participant had health barriers that made physical activity difficult. Nevertheless, she had managed to find pleasure in activities by adapting physical activity requirements based on a functional level assumption:

I cannot walk in the mountains. I have learned that walking around the corner is also a form of exercise. Walking around the “corner” takes only 10 minutes. Suddenly I may have walked for 15 minutes. It is more than nothing. It does not have to be an exhausting activity.

Two of the female informants had additional responsibility for children with special challenges. This was a contributing factor to sick leave. The additional obligations for children also prevented physical activity. After participating in VR, one of them chose to reduce work participation from 100% to 80% to prioritise physical activity. The motivation for physical activity was also shown by the other mothers who applied for 30% disability benefits due to health complaints. In that way, she managed both continuous work participation and physical activity but accepted less income. These mothers found a balance between family obligations and taking care of their health. One of the women talked about her new lifestyle and expressed: “I use my trips as a break. Then I think of everything and nothing. No children were quarrelling or bullying each other. That’s good for me.”

Most participants exercised several times a week with swimming, hiking, running, bicycling, weight training, walking and interval exercise. Physical capacity contributed to the participants’ increased energy level, strength, and social contact both at work and in general. It seems that most of the participants preferred to exercise during the morning because they experienced that early activity contributes to reasonably healthy choices for the rest of the day. The activity level positively influenced their image of health, ability to handle the workloads, and participation in family and social activity.

Support from the Surroundings: Vicarious Experience and Verbal Persuasion

The last sub-theme contains information about how support from colleagues, family and others may promote and inhibit the participants success in life. The participants regarded their colleagues and employer as essential factors for support. During the interviews, stories were told about how colleagues’ support was valued and motivated their work participation. Some, like this lady, had experienced that her colleagues and employer had supported her: “They applauded me! When I got back to work after sick leave, I had no fear.” Furthermore, working in groups was highlighted: “Nice to be a part of the team, we are good in teams. I know we are doing a good job.”

Not everyone had an extended framework consisting of supportive colleagues. The lorry driver worked most of the time alone, driving his lorry. His working frame did not facilitate extended physical contact with other colleagues. He stopped along the road in diners to meet other lorry drivers, and they exchanged experiences and sharing from their everyday life. He talked about a “lorry-driver culture”: “We are meeting at the dinner, and then it is about being the biggest liar [Laughter].” He is not a “talker” and likes to listen, but he still finds this “lorry driver culture” supportive.

Besides employers and colleagues, the participants highlighted family and friends’ support that affected their attitudes to life and lifestyle. Families provided support through working with the participant to implement new routines for the whole family regarding food habits and exercise. “A lucky man” talked proudly about his wife: “My wife supports me. She makes healthy food, and we exercise together… it helps me a lot that she is with me.” This support is essential for continuing a healthy lifestyle and for faith and motivation. A supportive family seems essential in a healthy lifestyle and handling health concerns. One of the women had an opposite experience where the family had another food habit than she and shared no interest in her process:

I experienced that it was challenging to come home after VR and have to arrange the food myself. My husband and two children were not in the process as I. I sat with my crispbreads while they enjoyed themselves with delicious food. It didn’t take that long a time before I started eating the food the family ate.

Another inhibiting factor was family members who secretly ate sweets and unhealthy food but forgot to throw out the packaging. When her husband “was eating potato chips when we were sitting on the couch,” one of the women decided, “I had to go to bed because I could not sit and watch him.” The family’s ability to support the participants’ seems to influence their ability to master the activity needed for faith, motivation, and success.

For two of the mothers who still had children living at home, a family situation where the partner is working long periods away from home results in little support in their daily life, which was experienced as exhausting and, in the end, affected their life in general and thereby their work participation.

Methodological Considerations

The present study aimed to use the four sources of self-efficacy to examine participants’ experience, attitudes, and viewpoints regarding the association between work, health and lifestyle factors that influenced work participation 2 to 4 years after they had participated in the new VR programme with lifestyle intervention. Before the interview, the participants received both written and oral information about the aim and subjects of the FG. The participants’ voices on what they see as promoting and inhibiting factors in the related fields of obesity and work participation is vital for insight into this relatively unexplored area.

The strength of this study has been the choice of a FG interview to gain insight into participants’ experiences since the aim of qualitative methods is to seek the participants’ experiences of social phenomena. As such, these methods can identify nuances and complexity not otherwise accessible. 38

Another strength is that the FG led to a certain level of empowerment of the participants. 31 The participants came up with new topics that were meaningful to them, which they discussed and which contributed to a meaning-creating process. In addition, they exchanged experiences and explored each other’s opinions which, for some, gave inspiration and motivation for their lifestyle and work participation.

The timing of the interview- 2 to 4 years after completing the VR programme with the lifestyle intervention is another strength. Following the participants’ experiences through VR and the time afterwards has been crucial for obtaining information that contributes to a broad picture about their diverse life experiences regarding health, lifestyle, and work.

Findings indicate that the participants differed in work- and family status, body weight and health complaints. These differences provide insight into those participants who had and did not have body weight reduction as well as into working participants and participants temporarily outside the workforce on promoting or inhibiting factors affecting their health, lifestyle, and work participation.

The last strength was that the first and last author collaborated through the process by conducting the interviews, going through the interviews after each FG, analysing and discussing the findings in the data, and establishing themes presented in this article.

Two FGs had four participants, and the last had three. The information from the one FG with four participants was narrower than the other two. The reason might be the combination of different personalities in the group: two participants were modest, one talked more than the others, and gender distribution was three men and one woman. In addition, this was the first FG for the first author who was inexperienced in leading an FG. In total, this may have affected the FG and execution.

Another limitation in the other two FGs was that some participants spoke more than others, leading the moderators to intervene in the dialogue to promote the modest participants. This may have influenced the group dynamic and the overall contribution to data.

Discussion of Results

Even though Bandura’s four sources of self-efficacy are discussed separately, it is important to have in mind that the sources influence each other, contributing together to participants’ self-efficacy regarding health, lifestyle and work participation. The data reported provides an opportunity to hear the participants’ attitudes on what promotes and inhibits their self-efficacy towards work participation.

The participants experienced working together in teams as an important source for continued and remaining work participation. Furthermore, their experience of employers who provided tailored work promoted a healthy lifestyle and a positive job culture. When the participants succeed with a lifestyle change, RTW, or other tasks at work, they will, according to mastery experience, obtain truly, genuine and objective evidence for their ability to succeed. 27 Our findings support existing literature regarding workplace modification contributing to healthier nutrition, physical activity, working hours, and preventing one participant from taking sick leave due to night shifts. 39–42

As the participants had spent a quarter of their life at work, they had extensive work participation and experience about how work affects them. Participants emphasised job satisfaction as an important factor for their well-being at work and RTW, which is highly influenced by past and present experiences, which is also supported in the literature. 14 , 21 , 43 , 44 Unconventional working hours and unmodified work are associated with loss of motivation and work absence. Not being heard can reduce their self-efficacy by undermining their efforts in difficult situations resulting in loss of faith in required skills to stay-at-work. 27 In addition, failure to succeed will reduce self-efficacy if a failure occurs in the early lifestyle change and RTW process. Promoting and inhibiting factors in the main theme are especially significant because they are based on mastery experiences, the most influential source of efficacy information. 27 , 35 These findings support existing literature where working conditions can contribute to illness, disability, and absence. 45 , 46

It is important to address the feeling of joy, social inclusion, and devotion to work as important sources of work self-efficacy. The participants’ stories about work are strongly associated with past and present mastery experience. 13 , 35 , 47 , 48

My Attitude to Life: Mastery Experience

Attitude to life influences both at work and in other areas of life. Job satisfaction and the wish to maintain work that requires a medical certificate contribute positively to losing body weight. Adapted coping strategies affected the participants’ lifestyles and how they solved stress connected with work participation. Further, strategies contributed to balancing between allowing and denying, knowing how to deal with messy thoughts and feelings, and accepting that I am good enough. Increased self-efficacy, built by previous experiences, seems to establish a strong belief in their outcome expectancy “I know I can” contributing to positive activity performance. Another interesting finding is how some of the participants had, in the process, managed to describe adjustments customised to their needs that enabled them to maintain or return to work. They found their value as employees and claimed adjustments to ensure a balance between health and work demands. Attitudes and strategies, in general, seem to affect how the participants’ chooses to accomplish tasks and activity, and these again affect how they cope with life. Our findings merge with systematic reviews where higher self-efficacy are associated with sustained work participation despite health problems. 13 , 43 Negative strategies among the participants were characterised by no future goals, lower self-efficacy, and a higher sense of failure when they failed with lifestyle change, and these findings also support other studies. 13 , 43

In the interviews, the participants described life with its ups and downs. When life is tough, everything is complicated, and when life is good, they feel strong and unbeatable. Stories about dealing with these ups and downs provided insights into what promotes and inhibits choices associated with life in general and work participation. Seem to be better able to make choices in situations that arise and to accomplish tasks and activities. 27

Body size influenced work participation, and structure and working frames affected the participants’ lifestyle and body weight loss. Body weight reduction among the participants gave health benefits that contributed to the renewal of a driver’s licence and medical certificate, made it easier to carry out work tasks, allowed wearing workwear in normal sizes and extended social contact. Loss of body weight increased participants’ ability to work and enhanced work self-efficacy and is supported by previous studies that indicated that weight loss positively affects work capacity, mood, working memory, and body image, and this can contribute to increased self-efficacy. 26 , 49 , 50

Body size is negatively associated with work participation due to musculoskeletal disorders, stigma, and discrimination, and this has been supported in a meta-analysis of 29 longitudinal studies where health problems were an important barrier for maintaining paid employment. 2 , 7 Our findings of the participants’ experiences of body size are also supported in systematic reviews, such as persons with obesity being hired less frequently than those with average body weight and receiving less frequent promotions than individuals of average body weight 51 and on the association between obesity and musculoskeletal disorders. 2 The participants’ stories indicated that body size may have influenced how they judged their self-efficacy concerning work participation and life in general. Emotional reactions to activities, tasks, and situations due to body size seemed to affect their judgment of their ability to complete tasks in different areas. 27

Physical capacity is highlighted as an essential factor for most of the participants. Physical activity contributes to protecting and reducing medical conditions such as heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, stress, depression, anxiety, and lower BMI, all important factors both for health and work participation. 52 Participants’ physical endurance profited them in activity at work and at leisure time, and several of the participants appreciated a job with physical activity requirements that contributed to increasing their physical capacity. It seems that physical activity at work and in private, contributes to coping with work demands and building self-efficacy. Previous research indicates that better health (ie better general physical and mental health) reduces sick leave, results in earlier return to work following sick leave, and reduces the risk of work disability for people with chronic diseases. 22 Our findings support existing literature indicating that physical activity increases mobility and lower extremity function, as well as reduces arthritis pain, energy level and well-being. 1 , 5 In addition, the participants thought it was important to customise activity to their life situations and to find a suitable balance between their own needs adapted to the family’s, a finding that also supports existing literature. 45 It seems that improvement in physical endurance and capacity may increase personal efficacy through how individuals feel and think of themselves. 27

Colleagues, employers, and families are highlighted as important contributions for support for work participation and life in general. Support from colleagues and employers may be crucial for a healthy work environment and work culture, important factors for job satisfaction and successful RTW. It seems that the participants’ increased self-efficacy after participating in the VR programme, together with perceived support, had a positive impact on them. This study’s findings support existing literature on colleagues’ and employers’ roles as facilitators and that positive attitude and self-efficacy may contribute positively to maintaining or increasing work participation. 19 , 53–56

Having social support from one’s family can help in coping with health concerns, and this study’s findings highlights supportive family as an important factor in a healthy lifestyle where new habits occur and continue. In addition, support from the family affects the total life situation, which affects the participants’ work ability. In contrast, lack of support affects participants’ physical activity, body weight (such as weight cycling), and may contribute to lower self-efficacy. It seems that positive appraisal from acquaintances and observing people around them raised participants’ belief in their ability to master the activity needed for faith, motivation, and success. Assumptions concerning self-efficacy increase or decrease depending on whom the participants imitate and through positive or negative assessment from others. 27 Our findings are similar to the existing literature for people with nonspecific musculoskeletal disorder. 22 , 43 , 44

Conclusions

The present study aimed to use the four sources of self-efficacy to examine participants’ experiences, attitudes, and viewpoints regarding associations between work, health, and lifestyle factors that might influence work participation with a focus group design 2 to 4 years after completing the new VR programme with lifestyle intervention. One main theme and four sub-themes emerged from the analyses and were highlighted as important for the participants’ self-efficacy and work participation. Job satisfaction seems to occur from a healthy work culture and from employers who modify work and contribute to a healthy lifestyle at work. The participants with high job satisfaction seem to have had a resilient sense of self-efficacy in overcoming obstacles at work through effort and perseverance.

Factors like positive attitudes, efficient coping strategies, a high self-efficacy, and acceptance that “I am good enough” seem to characterise those who lose weight and stay there. It seems that increased self-efficacy combined with a high outcome expectancy such as “I know I can” makes them stronger in overcoming weight cycling and other obstacles in a lifestyle change process and work participation.

Participants’ body size influenced their work performance, and several of the participants experienced stigma and discrimination. Lower self-images seem to lead to avoidance of fire drills and first aid courses and requests for security equipment made for people with obesity. The participants’ body size seems to impact how they judge themselves and influences their self-efficacy concerning work participation and life in general.

Two to four years after completing the VR programme, good physical capacity was more important than weight reduction. Physical activity and physical endurance were highlighted as a source of personal efficacy regarding how they felt and thought about themselves.

Colleagues, employers, and families form a supportive network contributing to a healthy lifestyle and work participation. Participants who cooperate and collaborate with their network and receive verbal support increased their belief in mastering the activities needed for success in lifestyle and work participation.

In this study Mastery Experience and Physiological and Affective States are the two most influential sources of Bandura’s self-efficacy model. This study’s finding indicates that VR programmes should be aware that the level of self-efficacy can predict behaviour change and the likelihood of successfully embracing and coping with life.

The main finding, “work participation enhances quality of life” highlights how participants value work participation as a meaningful activity and positively influence their work self-efficacy. Future VR programs should pay attention to interventions focusing on the workplace, cognitive approaches to develop skills for coping strategies, lifestyle change purposing BMI reduction, physical activity, and support from the surroundings.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank all the participants who agreed to participate in the FG interviews. They provided their time and effort to give insightful information about their life situation regarding their lifestyle and work ability.

Funding Statement

The Central Norway Regional Health Authority funded this study. Volda University College provided PhD funding for Anita Dyb Linge.

Abbreviations

VR, Vocational Rehabilitation; FG, Focus group; BMI, Body Mass Index; RTA, Reflexive thematic analyze; HRQoL, Health-Related Quality of Life; RTW, Return To Work; NAV, Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration; CASP, Critical Appraisal Skills Programme; REC, Norwegian Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics Central Norway.

Ethics Approval and Informed Consent

There is a range of approaches to judging the quality of qualitative analysis. In this article, Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) for qualitative research checklist has been followed. 57 This study was approved by the Norwegian Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics Central Norway (REC) 2017/573 and is registered in Clinical Trials {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT03286374","term_id":"NCT03286374"}} NCT03286374 . All written consents to participate in this study followed the laws and guidelines for proper health research and treatment in the Specialised Health Care services in Norway and are in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration. In addition to the written consent, the participants provided verbal informed consent that anonymised findings shared during the FG interviews could be published.

Author Contributions

All authors (A.D.L, C.J, S.K.B and B.H) made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis, and interpretation, or in all these areas. Further, they have drafted or written, or substantially revised, or critically reviewed the article and agreed on the journal to which the article will be submitted. In addition, they have reviewed and agreed on all versions of the article before submission, during revision, the final version accepted for publication, and any significant changes introduced at the proofing stage. All authors agreed to take responsibility and be accountable for the contents of the article.

Additional information:

ADL. The main investigator designed the study protocol (in close collaboration with B.H), collected data, held responsibility for database quality assessment, analysed and thematised findings (in close collaboration with B.H), integrated theory and finding (in close collaboration with S.K.B) and wrote the first draft of the manuscript and its successive revisions.

SKB. He has made a significant contribution to the integrated theory and finding (in close collaboration with A.D.L).

BH. She has made a significant contribution to the design of the qualitative study, being a moderator in the FG interviews, going through and analysed the interviews together with ADL.

All authors (A.D.L, CJ, SKB, and BH) have agreed to ensure that issues related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even those in which they were not personally involved, are investigated, resolved and resolution properly documented.

The authors, Anita Dyb Linge, Chris Jensen, Stål Bjørkly and Bente Hasle declare that they have no conflict of interest in this study.

Self-efficacy Theory and Learning Environment Research

  • Published: May 1999
  • Volume 2 , pages 157–167, ( 1999 )

Cite this article

  • Anthony Lorsbach 1 &
  • Jerry Jinks 1  

3254 Accesses

51 Citations

Explore all metrics

The purpose of this article is to bring to the attention of educators interested in student perceptions of the learning environment the concept of self-efficacy. Social learning theorists define perceived self-efficacy as a sense of confidence regarding the performance of specific tasks. Our premise is that student self-efficacy beliefs regarding academic performance can have important implications for improving learning environments and, consequently, student outcomes. We believe that focusing on students' academic self-efficacy could alter student perceptions of the learning environment. Unlike most beliefs systems, which can be highly personal, academic self-efficacy is generally a belief that is addressable in a classroom context. Therefore, understanding more about the reciprocal relationship between the learning environment and students' academic self-efficacy beliefs should be a fruitful focus for learning environment research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

self efficacy theory research paper

Self-Efficacy Research in Online Learning

self efficacy theory research paper

Self-Efficacy and Engaged Learners

self efficacy theory research paper

What Shapes Academic Self-efficacy?

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review , 84, 19–1215.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist , 37, 122–147.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Google Scholar  

Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist , 44, 1175–1184.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control . New York: Freeman.

Biran, M. & Wilson, G.T. (1981). Treatment of phobic disorders using cognitive and exposure methods: a self-efficacy analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 49, 886–899.

Bouffard-Bouchard, T. (1990). Influence of self-efficacy on performance in a cognitive task. Journal of Social Psychology , 130, 353–363.

Bouffard-Bouchard, T., Parent, S. & Larivée, S. (1991). Influence of self-efficacy on self-regulation and performance among junior and senior high-school aged students. International Journal of Behavior Development , 14, 153–164.

Brown, I., Jr. & Inouye, D.K. (1978). Learned helplessness through modeling: the role of perceived similarity in competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 36, 900–908.

Collins, J.L. (1982, March). Self-efficacy and ability in achievement behavior . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

Eccles, J.S. & Midgley, C. (1989). State-environment fit: developmentally appropriate classrooms for young adolescents. In R. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education, vol. 3: goals and cognitions (pp. 139–186). New York: Academic Press.

Feltz, D.L., Landers, D.M. & Raeder, U. (1979). Enhancing self-efficacy in high-avoidance motor tasks: a comparison of modeling techniques. Journal of Sport Psychology , 1, 112–122.

Fisher, D.L. & Fraser, B.J. (1991). School climate and teacher professional development. South Pacific Journal of Teacher Education , 19, 17–32.

Fraser, B.J. (1990). Individualised Classroom Environment Questionnaire . Melbourne, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.

Fraser, B.J. (1998). Classroom environment instruments: development, validity and applications. Learning Environments Research , 1, 7–33.

Fraser, B.J., Anderson, G.J. & Walberg, H.J. (1982). Assessment of learning environments: manual for Learning Environment Inventory (LEI) and My Class Inventory (MCI) (3rd ed.). Perth, Australia: Western Australian Institute of Technology.

Fraser, B.J. & Fisher, D.L. (1994). Assessing and researching the classroom environment. In D.L. Fisher (Ed.), The study of learning environments, volume 8 (pp. 23–38) Perth, Australia: Curtin University of Technology.

Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and human interests . Boston, MA: Beacon.

Jinks, J.L. & Morgan, V.L. (1996). Students' sense of academic efficacy and achievement in science: a useful new direction for research regarding scientific literacy? The Electronic Journal of Science Education [On-line], 1(2). Available: http://unr.edu/ homepage/jcannon/jinksmor.html

Kiley, T.J. & Jensen, R.A. (1998). Cooperating and student teachers' actual and preferred learning environments: a matched pair analysis. Learning Environments Research , 1, 181–197.

Lorsbach, A.W. (1992). Air drums and boredom: how a smart kid survives science class. In H.C. Waxman & C.D. Ellett (Eds.), The study of learning environments, volume 5 (pp. 34–41). Houston, TX: University of Houston.

Lorsbach, A.W. & Tobin, K. (1995). Toward a critical approach to the study of learning environments in science classrooms. Research in Science Education , 25, 19–32.

Moos, R.H. (1974). The Social Climate Scales: an overview . Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Moos, R.H. & Trickett, E.J. (1987). Classroom Environment Scale manual (2nd. ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research , 66, 543–578.

Rosenholtz, S.J. & Rosenholtz, S.H. (1981). Classroom organization and the perception of ability. Sociology of Education , 54, 132–140.

Roth, W.-M. (1998). Teacher-as-researcher reform: student achievement and perceptions of learning environment. Learning Environments Research , 1, 75–93.

Schunk, D.H. (1981). Modeling and attributional effects on children's achievement: a self-efficacy analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology , 73, 93–105.

Schunk, D.H. (1982). Effects of effort attributional feedback on children's perceived self-efficacy and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology , 74, 548–556.

Schunk, D.H. (1983). Progress self-monitoring: effects on children's self-efficacy and achievement. Journal of Experimental Education , 51, 89–93.

Schunk, D.H. (1984). Self-efficacy perspective on achievement behavior. Educational Psychologist , 19, 48–58.

Schunk, D.H. (1989a). Self-efficacy and achievement behaviors. Educational Psychology Review , 1, 173–208.

Schunk, D.H. (1989b). Social cognitive theory and self-regulated learning. In B.J. Zimmerman & D.H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: theory, research and practice (pp. 186–213). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Taylor, P., Fraser, B.J. & Fisher, D.L. (1997). Monitoring constructivist classroom learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research , 27, 293–302.

Tobin, K. (1998). Qualitative perceptions of learning environments on the World Wide Web. Learning Environments Research , 1, 139–162.

Waxman, H.C. & Huang, S.L. (1998). Classroom learning environments in urban elementary, middle, and high schools. Learning Environments Research , 1, 95–113.

Welch, W.W. & Walberg, H.J. (1972). A national experiment in curriculum evaluation. American Educational Research Journal , 9, 373–383.

Zimmerman, B.J., Bandura, A. & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: the role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Research Journal , 29, 663–676.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Illinois State University, Normal, IL, 61790, USA

Anthony Lorsbach & Jerry Jinks

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Lorsbach, A., Jinks, J. Self-efficacy Theory and Learning Environment Research. Learning Environments Research 2 , 157–167 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009902810926

Download citation

Issue Date : May 1999

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009902810926

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • learning environments
  • self-efficacy
  • students' perceptions
  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

VIDEO

  1. Self-efficacy theory by Albert Bandura

  2. Bandura Self Efficacy Theory🦾 #motivation #quotes #youtubeshorts

  3. 10 Signs That He's The One For You

  4. Attribution Theory and Self-Efficacy Theory

  5. Topic Name:Self efficacy Theory & Reinforcement Theory Motivation Concepts Lec 5 #youtube #ytstudio

  6. Student Explains How She Uses Self-Efficacy

COMMENTS

  1. (PDF) Self-efficacy and human motivation

    Abstract and Figures. Self-efficacy refers to perceived capabilities to learn or perform actions at designated levels. Theory and research support the idea that self-efficacy is an important ...

  2. The Confounded Self-Efficacy Construct: Review, Conceptual Analysis

    Self-Efficacy Theory. According to self-efficacy theory, self-efficacy is defined as perceived capability to perform a target behaviour (Bandura, 1977, 1986, 1997, 2004).At the time that self-efficacy was first introduced, dominant theories of behaviour emphasized outcome expectancies: expectations of the outcomes that may result from successfully performing the target behaviour (Feather, 1982).

  3. Academic self-efficacy: from educational theory to instructional

    The nature and structure of self-efficacy. The self-efficacy component of Albert Bandura's social-cognitive theory is believed by many scholars to be a critically important theoretical contribution to the study of academic achievement, motivation, and learning [2, 3, 8].In his influential book on the topic, Bandura [] summarized the importance of self-efficacy in the following way:

  4. Self-Efficacy Theory

    Advances in Motivation Science. Dale H. Schunk, Maria K. DiBenedetto, in Advances in Motivation Science, 2021 7 Conclusion. Self-efficacy theory and research have made important contributions to the study and understanding of human motivation. Researchers have shown that self-efficacy is a key internal motivational process that can be affected by personal and environmental variables and which ...

  5. Self-Efficacy Theory

    With his self-efficacy theory, Albert Bandura proposed a conceptual framework to (a) study how different sources of self-efficacy such as experiences would work to change behavior and (b) concretely guide interventions and their design. Many researchers and practitioners have used this framework. However, while self-efficacy theory influenced ...

  6. Full article: The self-efficacy and academic performance reciprocal

    These findings are consistent with self-efficacy theory related to mastery of experience (Bandura, Citation 1997), and prior longitudinal research in tertiary (Burns et al., Citation 2019; Gibbons & Raker, Citation 2018; Villafane et al., Citation 2016) and meta-analytic studies (Talsma et al., Citation 2018). This shows students, at least to ...

  7. Self-efficacy and human motivation

    Self-efficacy refers to perceived capabilities to learn or perform actions at designated levels. Theory and research support the idea that self-efficacy is an important motivational construct that can affect choices, effort, persistence, and achievement. Situated in Bandura's social cognitive theory, self-efficacy is a personal construct that ...

  8. Frontiers

    1 Developmental and Educational Psychology, Jaume I University, Castellón, Spain; 2 Developmental and Educational Psychology, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain; Although there is considerable evidence to support the direct effects of self-efficacy beliefs on academic achievement, very few studies have explored the motivational mechanism that mediates the self-efficacy-achievement ...

  9. Self-Efficacy Theory and Research: Applications in Clinical and

    The relationships of career-related self-efficacy expectations to perceived career options in college women and men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 399-410. Article Google Scholar. Betz, N.E., & Hackett, G. (1986). Applications of self-efficacy theory to understanding career choice behavior.

  10. Self-Efficacy Theory

    Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. Article PubMed Google Scholar. Bandura, A. (1982a). The assessment and predictive generality of self-percepts of efficacy. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Psychiatry, 13, 195-199.

  11. Self-Efficacy in a Nursing Context

    Self-efficacy is one of the most ubiquitous term found in social, psychological, counselling, education, clinical and health literatures. The purpose of this chapter is to describe and evaluate self-efficacy theory and the studies most relevant to the nursing context. This chapter provides an overview of the development of self-efficacy theory, its five components and the role of self-efficacy ...

  12. Self-Efficacy and Workplace Well-Being: Understanding the Role of

    Engaging in behavior that enhances the socio-psychological relations at the workplace provides a competitive advantage to organizations. Drawing from the emerging positive organizational behavior studies, the present research was designed to analyze the relationship between self-efficacy and resilience to promote workplace well-being.

  13. Research self-efficacy: A meta-analysis

    Abstract. Research self-efficacy represents the adaptation of the social cognitive concept of self-efficacy to the field of academic and scientific research and is one of the best predictors of successfully engaging in research activities. The current meta-analysis focuses on the relationship between research self-efficacy and 14 other relevant ...

  14. Self-EfficacyTheory

    Self-efficacy, 1. a concept derived from Social Learning Theory, provides a theoretical framework for behavior change. This framework can be used by the occupational health nurse to develop programs designed to effect behavior change. Research 2. studies focusing on behavior change (e.g., smoking cessation, weight control, exercise and cardiac ...

  15. Self-Efficacy

    Self-efficacy, a major component of Bandura's social cognitive theory, is the belief in one's capacity to complete a task, rather than the relevant skills possessed (Bandura, 1997).Both are needed to function effectively, with belief affecting the course of action, effort applied, perseverance in the face of adversity, strengths of negative affects experienced, and level of accomplishment ...

  16. Self-efficacy in sport: research and strategies for working with

    Part I. Understanding Self-Efficacy Theory in Sport Part II. The Nature of Efficacy Beliefs in Athletes, Teams and Coaches Part III. ... Semantic Scholar's Logo. Search 217,184,525 papers from all fields of science. Search. Sign In Create Free Account. Corpus ID: 152594746; Self-efficacy in sport: research and strategies for working with ...

  17. Bandura's Self-Efficacy Model Used to Explore Participants' Experiences

    Self-efficacy is a dynamic construct that explains the development of motivation and coping strategies and may be a useful approach for understanding the self-management aspects of RTW and lifestyle change. 14, 26 Self-efficacy is defined as "belief in one's abilities to organise and execute the courses of action required to produce a given ...

  18. A Theoretical Approach to Stress and Self-efficacy☆

    This paper aims to establish a theoretical approach of the stress and self-efficacy issue. This article provides an overview of the literature regarding the definition of stress and general adaptation syndrome, summarizing the specific stress related approaches .This theoretical article also highlights and explains the cognitive activation stress theory.

  19. Self-efficacy Theory and Learning Environment Research

    The purpose of this article is to bring to the attention of educators interested in student perceptions of the learning environment the concept of self-efficacy. Social learning theorists define perceived self-efficacy as a sense of confidence regarding the performance of specific tasks. Our premise is that student self-efficacy beliefs regarding academic performance can have important ...