MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414297972 · doi:10.5539/hes.v15n4p216

Attitudes in Action: Examining the Impact of Chinese Language Learning Attitudes on Academic Success Among International Students in Sichuan

2025· article· en· W4414297972 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zou Xuan, Penpisut Sikakaew

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfirmatory factor analysisLanguage proficiencyMediationChinese languageVariance (accounting)Language acquisitionRegression analysisMultilevel model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Guided by Expectancy-Value Theory, this quantitative cross-sectional survey examined the relationship between learning attitudes, course satisfaction, and learning outcomes among non-degree international students (N=390, 97.5% response rate) from three Sichuan universities, predominantly from Southeast Asia. Measurement validity was established through confirmatory factor analysis. Regression analyses revealed that learning attitudes significantly predicted both learning outcomes (β = .59, p < .001) and course satisfaction (β = .33, p < .001). Course satisfaction also positively predicted learning outcomes (β = .41, p < .001). Mediation tests further showed that course satisfaction partially mediated the effect of learning attitudes on outcomes, increasing the explained variance from 36.3% to 41.1% (ΔR² = .048, ΔF significant). Findings highlight the importance of aligning Chinese language pedagogy with students’ motivational appraisals and satisfaction subscales. This study not only deepens the understanding of the effectiveness of Chinese language instruction but also provides practical guidance for the improvement and reform of Chinese language courses in universities, aiming to enhance international students' language learning experiences and their proficiency in Chinese.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.383 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207