The effect of metacognition on students’ chemistry identity: the chain mediating role of chemistry learning burnout and chemistry learning flow

Abstract

With the urgent goal of increasing student retention within science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields, STEM identity is highlighted as a powerful source of student persistence. Since chemistry is...

The relationship between error beliefs in chemistry and chemistry learning outcomes: a chain mediation model investigation

“…If the first factor's explained variance was no more than 40% and less than half of the cumulative interpretation total variance, there was no common method bias (Mo et al, 2019). Then, since our model was a saturated model (Nurkhaidarov and Shochat, 2011;Steeger and Gondoli, 2013;Zhang et al, 2019), we didn't report how well the complete model fitted the data, but only considered the path coefficient (Guo et al, 2022). The direct and mediating effects in the hypothesized model were tested using the structural equation model (SEM) with Mplus 8.3 (Zhang et al, 2022).…”

“…For the EFA result, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) should be higher than 0.6, and the p value of Bartlett's sphericity test should be less than 0.05 (Bartlett, 1951;Guo et al, 2022). Items would be retained if their factor loading scores were more than 0.4 and cross-loading scores were less than 0.32 (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2001;Costello and Osborne, 2005;Wei et al, 2020).…”

“…As for the mediation analysis method, the bias-corrected percentile Bootstrap method has been demonstrated to be one of the best ways, because the Bootstrap method does not require normality hypothesis or large samples, and there is no need for standard error to estimate the mediating effect interval (Preacher and Hayes, 2008;Taylor et al, 2008;Fang et al, 2014). Therefore, in this study, we used the biascorrected percentile Bootstrap method to sample the formal data 2000 times with a 95% confidence interval, with the aim of testing the significance of the mediating effect (Guo et al, 2022). If the 95% Bootstrap confidence interval (CI) doesn't cover zero, the mediating effect is significant (Lau and Cheung, 2012;Fang et al, 2014;Hayes, 2015).…”

The relationship between self-handicapping in chemistry and chemistry academic engagement: a moderated mediation model investigation

“…The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin and Bartlett's test of sphericity showed the comprehensive data set to conduct the factor analysis. For the EFA result, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) is supposed to be greater than 0.6, and the p value of Bartlett's sphericity test should be less than 0.05 (Guo et al, 2022). If the cross-loading score is less than 0.32, and the factor-loading score is greater than 0.4, these items are retained (Wei et al, 2021).…”

“…The explanatory variance of the first factor in this study was 30.59%, which met the criteria of no common method bias. We then did not report how well the full model fit the data, but only considered the path coefficient (Guo et al, 2022) because our model was a saturation model (Nurkhaidarov and Shochat, 2011;Zhang et al, 2019;Huangfu et al, 2023). Subsequently, we used the Mplus 8.3 Structural Equation Model (SEM) to test this hypothetical model.…”