The Correlation between Business English Freshmen's Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Researchers have conducted numerous studies on the phenomenon of learners' motivation in foreign language acquisition; however, there is a paucity of research examining the relationship between English learning motivation and self-efficacy among Business English freshmen. This study aims to address three key questions to explore the correlation between English learning motivation and self-efficacy among Business English majors: (1) What is the level of English learning motivation among first-year business English majors? (2) What is the overall status of self-efficacy in English learning among first-year business English majors? (3) What is the association between English learning motivation and self-efficacy among first-year business English majors? Subsequently, employing SPSS data analysis, this research yields several noteworthy findings: firstly, the level of English learning motivation among first-year business English majors is significantly high; secondly, their perceived self-efficacy in mastering the language falls within a moderate range; finally, the relationship between English learning motivation and self-efficacy demonstrates a positive correlation (R=.595*).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it