Self‐efficacy latent growth trajectories' longitudinal links with achievement and interest: Both baseline and growth rate are important for interest outcomes

Abstract

Background:Self-efficacy has well established theoretical and empirical linkages to persistence and achievement. Budding theoretical and recent empirical research has worked to connect selfefficacy to students' interest. Building on research in these areas, burgeoning research has begun to examine the relative role of intercept and slope of self-efficacy for these learning outcomes.

The influencing factors of individual interest in physical education based on decision tree model: A cross-sectional study

“…This growing body of empirical evidence supporting the important role of self-efficacy within an interest is buttressed by long-standing theory suggesting that the two are reciprocally linked over time (Fryer et al, 2016(Fryer et al, , 2019Nuutila et al, 2020Nuutila et al, , 2021. Fryer et al (2021) used the potential curve to analyze the role of self-efficacy between knowledge development and individual interest, which lends further support to the critical role played by self-efficacy beliefs within the development not only of knowledge but also of individual interest as a learning outcome. The role of self-efficacy in determining individual interest has been confirmed by a large number of research results.…”

“…Reviews have consistently pointed that prior knowledge is one of the most important individual difference brought to the learning experience ( Lin and Chai, 2019 ; Fryer et al, 2021 ). Prior knowledge can account for 30–60% of the variance in future learning ( Tobias, 1994 ).…”

The Development of Accuracy and Fluency in Second Language (L2) Speaking Related to Self-Efficacy Through Online Scaffolding: A Latent Growth Curve Modeling Analysis

“…Firstly, non-linearity is one important feature of complex systems, which can only be studied through process-oriented research based on multiple observations (Lowie, 2017 ; van Geert & Steenbeek, 2005 ). Accuracy, fluency and complexity variables are developmental in nature (Larsen-Freeman, 2009 ; Norris & Ortega, 2009 ), and L2 self-efficacy was found to be dynamic (Fryer et al, 2022 ; Kyo, 2022 ; Leeming, 2017 ; Shirvan et al, 2018 ; Zhang et al, 2020 ), so they need to be tracked longitudinally. However, traditional modeling usually limits non-linearity to preset polynomial functions, which may not fit the complex and dynamic development.…”

“…Some recently published studies have used LGCM to analyze the development of language learner factors such as emotions, grit and self-efficacy (Fryer et al, 2022 ; Kyo, 2022 ; Shirvan et al, 2018 , 2021 ), but no previous study has ever used LGCM to analyze accuracy, fluency and complexity development in L2 speaking, or the relationship between oral accuracy, fluency and complexity and self-efficacy. To fill this gap, the current study made the first attempt to use LGCM to analyze the development of English speaking accuracy and fluency and the dynamic relationship between English speaking self-efficacy and oral English development.…”

“…Self-efficacy refers to one’s belief about whether or not one can perform a task successfully (Bandura, 1977 , 1997 ). L2 self-efficacy itself is not static and has been proven to change with time, as documented in some longitudinal studies (Fryer et al, 2022 ; Kyo, 2022 ; Leeming, 2017 ; Shirvan et al, 2018 ; Zhang et al, 2020 ); so it is necessary that L2 self-efficacy be investigated longitudinally so that the dynamic relationship between L2 development and self-efficacy can be examined. Unfortunately, no previous studies have ever analyzed whether the development of accuracy, fluency and complexity in L2 speaking is in relation to the development of self-efficacy.…”