Huaixia Hao
Qingying Zhu1
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
- 1School of Physical Education, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China
- 2School of Economics, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
Background: During their physical education courses, university students may encounter various academic pressures and difficulties, which significantly undermine their physical education learning motivation and affect their overall development. Multiple supports from teachers, parents, and peers can effectively help students maintain confidence and enhance their physical education learning motivation. However, the underlying mechanisms by which these multiple supports influence motivation for physical education remain unclear.
Objective: This study aims to explore the underlying mechanisms by which multiple supports influence learning motivation during physical education, specifically examining the mediating roles of self-efficacy and positive coping style. Additionally, it seeks to elucidate the complex configurational relationships among multiple supports, self-efficacy, coping style, and physical education learning motivation.
Methods: This study employs a cross-sectional survey method to investigate Chinese university students. Through convenience sampling, 969 students were recruited from four universities in Shandong Province. The participants completed the Teacher Support Scale, Parent Support Scale, Peer Support Scale, Self-Efficacy Scale, Positive Coping Style Scale, and Learning Motivation Scale. For data analysis, statistical processing was conducted using SPSS 26.0, Amos 22.0, and fsQCA 4.1.
Results: The results indicate that multiple supports from teachers, parents, and peers have significant direct effects on individual physical education learning motivation, with effect sizes of 0.132, 0.090, and 0.237, respectively. Self-efficacy acts as an independent mediator between multiple supports and physical education learning motivation, with effect sizes of 0.111, 0.076, and 0.197, respectively. Positive coping style also serve as an independent mediator in these relationships, with effect sizes of 0.091, 0.019, and 0.072; Self-efficacy and positive coping style function as a chain mediating mechanism between multiple supports and physical education learning motivation, with effect sizes of 0.021, 0.015, and 0.038; There are five equivalent configurations identified among multiple supports, self-efficacy, coping style, and physical education learning motivation.
Conclusion: Support from teachers, parents, and peers not only directly influences students’ physical education learning motivation but also indirectly predicts students’ physical education learning motivation through the independent and chain mediating roles of self-efficacy and coping style. Additionally, this study elucidates the complex configurational relationships among multiple supports, self-efficacy, coping style, and physical education learning motivation, thereby validating and supplementing the results of linear analysis.
1 Introduction
Creating and fostering students’ motivation for physical education (PE) learning and maximizing their enthusiasm for learning is crucial for PE teaching, as its benefits extend far beyond the knowledge and skills acquired in PE classes. Numerous studies have demonstrated that the positive experiences students gain in school PE significantly influence their motivation, intentions, and attitudes toward participating in physical exercise in their daily lives (Hagger et al., 2003; Cox et al., 2008; Barkoukis et al., 2010; Standage et al., 2012). Learning motivation is a psychological process that drives individuals to engage in learning activities. It can be broadly categorized into two types: extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation primarily includes factors such as external praise, scholarships, and support from teachers and peers, which can promote learning to a certain extent (Tranquillo and Stecker, 2016). In contrast, intrinsic motivation leads to more effective learning outcomes, as it is driven by an interest in the skills and knowledge themselves rather than external rewards. When learning is achieved, the individual receives high-level feedback such as a sense of satisfaction or accomplishment (Deci et al., 1996). Additionally, learning motivation not only determines an individual’s learning outcomes but also affects their ability to learn independently. Individuals with high levels of learning motivation exhibit greater engagement in their studies, achieve better academic performance, and are more likely to engage in self-directed learning during their free time (Nabizadeh et al., 2019; Zhang and Chen, 2021; Chang and Tsai, 2022). Self-Determination Theory (SDT) further suggests that the continuous development of an individual’s motivation depends on the satisfaction of three basic psychological needs – autonomy (perceiving behavior as self-directed), competence (confidence in achieving goals), and relatedness (feeling connected to others) (Ryan and Deci, 2000). When these needs are met by teacher support, peer interaction, or institutional environment, motivation shifts from external control to intrinsic drive, significantly enhancing learning motivation. This theoretical framework constructs a key path for analyzing the motivation mechanisms of college students’ physical education: it not only focuses on the empowerment mechanisms of external support systems but also explores how these supports act as intermediaries for motivation through psychological needs.
The physical education courses referred to in this paper refer specifically to the public physical education practice courses that are compulsory for non-sports majors under the guidance of physical education teachers. These courses mainly focus on outdoor training and are designed to help university student master basic sports knowledge and sports skills and promote their physical and mental health. Essentially, the PE teaching process imparts to university students not only knowledge and skills related to physical activities but also the mindset of maintaining regular exercise. During college, students need to persist in physical learning and exercise to master lifelong applicable sports knowledge and skills, laying the foundation for future physical activity. This requires a high level of learning motivation. Current research on university students’ learning motivation primarily falls into two categories: one uses longitudinal data to uncover causal relationships (Warburton, 2017), and the other explores the influence of internal and external supports (such as teacher support, peer support, etc.) on learning motivation (Qurban et al., 2019; An et al., 2022). Although these studies have contributed to enhancing university students’ motivation for PE learning, their focus remains on the impact of individual factors on learning motivation. Therefore, further exploration of the influence of multiple supports on university students’ motivation for PE learning is urgently needed.
Based on the considerations mentioned above, it is necessary to incorporate multiple support factors and university students’ motivation for PE learning into a single model, investigating the potential relationships, influencing mechanisms, and configurational effects between them. This approach aims to provide targeted theoretical guidance for PE teaching and consequently enhance university students’ motivation for PE learning.
1.1 The impact of teacher support, parental support, and peer support on physical education learning motivation
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, proposed in 1977, states that an individual’s development occurs within a multileveled, interconnected ecosystem, which includes the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem (Bronfenbrenner, 1977; Helgeson and Lopez, 2010). In the context of education, the theory emphasizes that internal factors are often the vehicle through which external factors exert their influence. For example, in a school physical education setting, external factors such as teacher support, parental support, and peer support can affect students’ internal cognitive and emotional factors, which in turn influence their motivation and behavior in physical education.
From a micro-system perspective, the academic support and emotional support of teachers in physical education directly affect individual students. Teachers’ patient guidance on students’ movements (academic support) and praise for students’ performance (emotional support) will make students feel cared for and recognized psychologically, and this positive emotional experience, as an internal factor, will enhance students’ motivation to learn physical education (Johnson et al., 1985; Patrick et al., 2007; Ruzek et al., 2016). On the contrary, students with less teacher support tend to avoid contact with teachers, leading to weak learning motivation and reduced learning efficiency (Deci and Ryan, 2000). Research by Pan and Shao (2020) also indicates a significant positive correlation between students’ learning motivation, teacher support, and learning engagement, with more attention and support from teachers correlating with increased time and effort invested by students in learning. In summary, although it is well established that teacher support back affects students’ motivation to learn, few studies have systematically investigated whether teacher support during physical education teaching still affects students’ physical education learning motivation. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the relationship between teacher support and physical education learning motivation during physical education teaching and to understand the corresponding mechanisms.
At the meso-level, parental support and the school sports teaching environment are interrelated. The material support (such as providing sports equipment) and spiritual encouragement (such as verbal praise) that parents give to their children in sports learning will form a synergistic effect with the sports teaching in school. The support that students feel in their families will make them more actively participate in school sports courses, thereby strengthening the role of teacher support in promoting students’ sports learning motivation. Previous research has indicated that parents play a significant role in determining whether children enjoy physical education learning and participation in sports (Edwardson and Gorely, 2010; Trost and Loprinzi, 2011). Parents who are passionate about sports can influence their children’s participation through both direct, practical support (providing transportation, financial support, etc.) and indirect, intangible support (verbal encouragement, emotional support, etc.), leading to stronger motivation for physical education learning and better performance (Beets et al., 2006; Pugliese and Tinsley, 2007; Edwardson and Gorely, 2010; Ryan and Deci, 2017). The relationship between parental support and adolescents’ engagement in physical education and sports has received ongoing attention (Edwardson and Gorely, 2010), and relevant systematic review studies have indicated that family involvement may enhance the effectiveness of school interventions aimed at promoting student participation in physical activities such as physical education teaching, sports competitions, leisure sports activities, etc. (Vasques et al., 2014). This suggests that the impact of parental support on individuals’ motivation for physical education learning extends beyond the family environment and may influence individuals through various channels. For university students who are undergoing the transition from adolescence to adulthood and facing the psychological impact of identity changes, as well as the need to balance academic, personal, and social aspects of life, parental support becomes even more crucial. While earlier research has predominantly focused on children, there is a paucity of studies on parental support and physical education learning among university students. Therefore, it is necessary to explore whether parental support can indeed influence the motivation for physical education learning among university students.
Peers play a crucial role in classroom learning, significantly influencing individuals’ learning motivation, adaptation to learning, and academic performance (Altermatt and Pomerantz, 2003; Kindermann, 2007; Wentzel et al., 2014). Relevant studies have found that peers can establish their unique social circles, provide emotional and behavioral support, help each other solve learning problems, accompany and engage in recreational interactions with one another (Wentzel, 1999, 2017). Perceiving high levels of peer support and encouragement, having a strong peer network, positive peer role models, and low levels of peer pressure have been shown to positively impact individuals’ learning motivation and achievement (Ryan and Patrick, 2001; Patrick et al., 2007; Wentzel, 2017). Some longitudinal research evidence also supports the role of peers in fostering individual learning motivation (Ryan and Shim, 2012; Shin and Ryan, 2014; Makara and Madjar, 2015). In fact, the dynamic changes in the establishment and development of peer relationships affect students’ performance in the learning process, with the similarity in academic goals among students and the mutual stimulation of learning motivation being closely related to peers (Shin and Ryan, 2014). For university students, peers remain an important source of ability information in the learning process (Altermatt and Pomerantz, 2003; Horn, 2004), Therefore, it is necessary to explore the potential mechanisms through which peer support stimulates physical education learning motivation among university students in the context of physical education learning.
Based on the above, this study proposes the first hypothesis:
H1: In the process of physical education teaching, multiple supports from PE teachers, parents and peers are positively related to university students’ physical education learning motivation.
1.2 The potential mediating role of self-efficacy
Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s confidence in executing plans and achieving expected goals (Bandura, 2001). Social theory suggests that self-efficacy is crucial for an individual’s learning behavior and academic performance, as it significantly influences learning motivation and emotions (Bandura, 1989). Students with high self-efficacy tend to be more confident in their academic pursuits, have stronger expectations of improving their abilities and academic achievements, thus leading them to invest more time and effort in their studies (Anam and Stracke, 2016). The Expectancy-Value Theory also points out a direct correlation between an individual’s motivation (including learning motivation) and self-efficacy (Wigfield and Eccles, 2000). Furthermore, empirical studies have indicated that self-efficacy is not only positively correlated with students’ learning motivation but also has a significant protective effect on it (Cetin-Dindar, 2016; Wu et al., 2020). Longitudinal studies have also demonstrated that self-efficacy can significantly predict an individual’s learning motivation (Alivernini and Lucidi, 2011).
The main sources influencing an individual’s self-efficacy include successful experiences, social persuasion, and emotional states. Previous research has shown that multiple supports such as from teachers, parents, and peers can effectively promote the development of individuals’ self-efficacy. Conversely, long-term lack of support may weaken students’ self-efficacy (Mercer et al., 2011). Clearly, there is a certain connection between multiple supports, self-efficacy, and learning motivation. Therefore, this study proposes the second hypothesis:
H2: In the process of physical education teaching, self-efficacy plays a mediating role between multiple supports and physical education learning motivation.
1.3 The potential mediating role of coping style
Coping style refer to the behavioral and cognitive responses individuals employ in specific situations to alleviate psychological burdens (Nattiv et al., 2007). University students may encounter various pressures and challenges during physical education learning. Adopting positive coping style (such as seeking help and changing strategies) can assist in effectively resolving issues, thereby increasing intrinsic motivation. Conversely, using negative coping style (such as avoidance, neglect, and anger) when facing challenging situations may lead to unsatisfactory outcomes (Gómez-Ortiz et al., 2016), accompanied by psychological distress (Tada, 2017). Research indicates that when students face academic difficulties, rational thinking and actively seeking help from others to obtain more resources and support can effectively solve problems, overcome learning stress, and adapt to the learning environment, thus contributing to enhanced learning motivation (Struthers et al., 2000). Therefore, positive coping style have a significant impact on maintaining learning motivation.
Multiple supports from teachers, family, and peers serve as reliable dependencies for individuals during the learning process, influencing their learning motivation, stress coping, and learning adaptation. University students who are frequently isolated and passive generally exhibit low learning motivation and are more likely to display discouragement and indecision when facing academic difficulties (Qu et al., 2023). Conversely, students under multiple supports are more willing to actively confront challenges, effectively maintaining high learning motivation, and overcoming the negative effects of stress (Hou et al., 2024). Based on the aforementioned experiences and theoretical evidence, this study proposes the third hypothesis:
H3: In the process of physical education teaching, coping style plays a mediating role between multiple supports and physical education learning motivation.
1.4 The chain mediating effect of self-efficacy and coping style
Research indicates that learning motivation may be influenced by self-efficacy and coping style (Hsiao, 2021), and all three are associated with multiple supports from teachers, parents, and peers. Coping style are also influenced by individual cognitive factors such as self-efficacy. In fact, the level of self-efficacy not only determines whether individuals can choose appropriate ways to deal with stress (Konaszewski et al., 2021), but also represents their confidence in overcoming difficulties (Bandura, 1977). Therefore, when facing academic difficulties or other stressful situations, students with high self-efficacy tend to choose positive coping style to solve problems and strive to cope with adverse situations, while students with low self-efficacy may give up prematurely or choose to avoid difficulties (Bandura and Locke, 2003; Geng et al., 2018; Chen et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020).
Recent relevant studies have identified the potential mechanism between external factors and learning motivation, confirming that self-efficacy and positive coping style play a mediating role in this mechanism (Liu and Li, 2019). Furthermore, multiple supports from various sources are important predictors of self-efficacy and coping style. Based on the research evidence mentioned above, this study posits that there may exist an indirect effect path of multiple supports → self-efficacy → positive coping style → physical education learning motivation between multiple supports and physical education learning motivation. Therefore, this study proposes the fourth hypothesis:
H4: In the process of physical education teaching, Self-efficacy and coping style play a chain mediating role between multiple supports and physical education learning motivation.
In summary, this study focuses on Chinese university students and aims to explore the relationship between multiple supports from PE teachers, parents, peers and physical education learning motivation during public physical education practice courses. It also investigates whether self-efficacy and coping style mediate this relationship. Additionally, the study will examine the complex configuration of multiple supports from PE teachers, parents, and peers, along with self-efficacy, coping style and physical education learning motivation. This research not only helps expand the factors influencing university students’ motivation in physical education but also provides theoretical foundations for interventions and plans aimed at improving university students’ motivation in physical education. Figure 1 illustrates the hypothetical model of this study.
Figure 1
Figure 1. Hypothetical model.
2 Materials and methods
2.1 Participants and data collection
This study adopted convenience sampling method, considering the limitations of time and resources in the actual research process, and selected 4 universities in Shandong Province using the convenience sampling method. It should be noted that in order to maximize the representativeness of the sample under the existing conditions, we conducted random sampling on the basis of convenience sampling. The specific operation was to randomly select students to participate in the survey from the selected 30 classes using a random number table. The research objects were all full-time undergraduate students from the first year to the third year of university, with ages mainly concentrated between 18 and 22 years old. Since the physical education courses have already ended in the fourth year of university, fourth-year university students were no longer included in the research sample. These students were all participating in the compulsory public physical education practice courses for non-physical education major students, such as basketball, volleyball, martial arts, aerobics, and so on, and were willing to participate in this study.
Initially, this study established exclusion criteria for invalid questionnaires: Firstly, incomplete provision of personal basic information. Secondly, selection of options in questions lacking logical coherence, displaying clear logical errors. Thirdly, more than 80% of responses being identical, indicating a pattern of consistent answering. Fourthly, more than 10 instances of missing answers throughout the entire survey. Fifthly, responses not meeting the specified requirements, demonstrating a phenomenon of answering questions that were not asked. Sixthly, selecting two or more options for single-choice questions. Subsequently, questionnaires were distributed to 1,050 students across 30 classes, and after screening based on the exclusion criteria for invalid questionnaires, 969 valid questionnaire samples were obtained, resulting in an effective response rate of 92.3%.
Respondents were all adults (18 years and older), aged 20.6 ± 0.78 (M ± SD); there were 549 males (56.66%) and 420 females (43.34%); 557 were only children (57.48%), and 412 were not (42.52%). The distribution by academic year was as follows: Freshman 334 (34.47%), sophomore 307 (31.68%), and junior 328 (33.85%) (Table 1).
Table 1
Table 1. Descriptive statistical analysis.
2.2 Instruments
The formal questionnaire of this study comprises two parts. The first part focuses on gathering basic demographic information. The second part incorporates comprehensive scales to assess various variables involved in the study.
2.2.1 Teacher support
The Teacher Support Scale, adapted for the purposes of this study, was utilized to assess the perceived level of teacher support among university students (Ober et al., 2021; Hagger et al., 2007). This scale comprises 10 items covering academic support (e.g., “During physical education classes, the teacher is willing to guide your movements”) and emotional support (e.g., “During physical education classes, your teacher often praises your performance”), utilizing a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree). Higher scores indicate a greater level of perceived teacher support. The Cronbach’s α coefficient for this scale in our study was 0.867.
2.2.2 Parental support
Parental support was assessed using the family subscale of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPS), appropriately adapted for the purposes of the study (Zimet et al., 1988; Hagger et al., 2007), replace “family” with “parents” (for example, I can discuss recent difficulties encountered in physical education teaching with my own parents). This subscale has 4 items in total and uses a 5-point Likert scoring method (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). The higher the score, the more parental support the individual receives. The Cronbach’s α of this scale in this study was 0.815.
2.2.3 Peer support
Peer support was measured using the Sports Social Support Scale compiled by Sallis et al. (1987) and adapted by Chen et al. (2017) and Hsu et al. (2011). This scale has 5 items in total (for example, your peers often encourage you to complete assignments and plans related to physical education classes), using a 5-point Likert scoring method (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree), the higher the score, the higher the score. High indicates that the individual receives more peer support. The Cronbach’s α of this scale in this study was 0.825.
2.2.4 Self-efficacy
The Chinese version of general self-efficacy developed by Schwarzer et al. (1997) was used to measure individual self-efficacy levels. This scale has 10 items in total (e.g., I can always solve problems if I try my best), using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree), the higher the score, the indicates that the individual’s self-efficacy is stronger. The Cronbach’s α of this scale in this study was 0.863.
2.2.5 Active coping style
The active coping style subscale of the simplified coping style scale compiled by Lazarus and Folkman (1987) was used to measure the individual’s active coping style. Xie (1998) have demonstrated that this scale has good reliability and validity in a Chinese environment. This scale has 10 items in total and adopts a 5-point Likert scoring method (1 = never, 5 = often). The higher the score on the active coping dimension, the greater the individual’s tendency to adopt active coping style. The Cronbach’s α of this scale in this study was 0.905.
2.2.6 Physical education learning motivation
The learning motivation scale compiled by Chi and Xin (2006) was used and adapted appropriately according to the purpose of this study to measure the individual’s physical education learning motivation. This scale has a total of 30 items, including two dimensions: extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation, and adopts a 5-point Likert scoring method (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree). The higher the score, the stronger the individual’s learning motivation. The Cronbach’s α of this scale in this study was 0.869.
2.3 Data analysis
The data analysis for this study was conducted using SPSS 26.0, Amos 22.0, and fsQCA 4.1. Firstly, Harman single-factor analysis was performed using SPSS to detect any significant common method bias. Secondly, Pearson correlation analysis was used to explore the relationships among multiple support, self-efficacy, coping style, and learning motivation. Thirdly, SEM (Structural Equation Modeling) was employed through Amos to investigate the direct and mediating effects among variables in depth. Finally, fsQCA 4.1 software was utilized for fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. This method, which assumes asymmetric relationships between dependent and independent variables, enables the exploration of complex non-linear causal relationships. According to Afonso et al.’s (2018) suggestion, level 5 is set as complete membership, level 1 is set as complete non-membership, and level 3 is set as the crossover point for data calibration. This is followed by a necessity analysis. Finally, a sufficiency analysis is performed to generate different configurations of mutual combinations of antecedent variables.
The rationale for conducting fsQCA analysis on top of SEM analysis in this study is as follows: (1) Using SEM and other traditional statistical methods to handle symmetric relationships, then applying fsQCA to explain causal asymmetry, can further reveal the effects of various variables on physical education learning motivation. (2) fsQCA can comprehensively analyze necessity and sufficiency relationships, effectively avoiding negative effects caused by multicollinearity. Furthermore, it helps to elucidate the complex causal interactions among multiple support, self-efficacy, coping style, and physical education learning motivation. (3) After identifying the interrelationships among variables using SEM, utilizing fsQCA based on set theory can further derive multiple equivalent strategies for enhancing students’ motivation in physical education.
2.4 Common method bias test
Due to the self-reported nature of data collection in this study, there is a potential for common method bias. To address this issue, the Harman single-factor test was employed. Principal component analysis was conducted on all measurement items without rotation. The results showed that the first principal component explained variance was 16.33%, which is below the critical threshold of 40%. Therefore, this study does not exhibit significant common method bias, allowing for subsequent statistical analysis.
3 Results and analyses
3.1 Correlation analysis
The study employed Pearson correlation analysis to assess the relationships between variables. The results are presented in Table 2. Significant positive correlations were found between all pairs of variables. This provides preliminary evidence supporting the validity of the hypotheses proposed in this study. Further investigation and analysis of these findings are warranted.
Table 2
Table 2. Matrix of correlation coefficients of the study variables.
3.2 SEM results
After completing the correlation analysis, the next step is to examine the structural equation model. Firstly, the model fit is good: χ2/df = 1.944; GFI = 0.936; NFI = 0.946; IFI = 0.973; CFI = 0.973; RMSEA = 0.043. Secondly, further analysis was conducted to investigate the direct impact relationships between variables. As shown in Table 3 and Figure 2, teacher support has a significant positive effect on physical education learning motivation (β = 0.09, p < 0.01); parental support has a significant positive effect on physical education learning motivation (β = 0.065, p < 0.01); peer support has a significant positive effect on physical education learning motivation (β = 0.205, p < 0.01). Therefore, in the process of physical education teaching, multiple supports from teachers, parents and peers are positively related to university students’ physical education learning motivation. Hypothesis 1 is supported. Additionally, this study also examined the direct impact relationships between other variables. The results show that all direct impact paths related to the study are positively significant. The next step is to test the possible mediating relationships between variables.
Table 3
Table 3. Test results for direct impact.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Model path diagram. **significant at 0.05 level; ***significant at 0.01 level.
The Bootstrap method was used to resample the sample 2000 times with a confidence interval set at 95%CI to test the significance of the mediating effects specified in the model. The results of the mediating effect test are shown in Table 4. Firstly, the explained variances of self-efficacy, coping style, and physical education learning motivation were 64, 50, and 58%, respectively, indicating that these explained variances have a high predictive ability. Secondly, observing specific path effects, it was found that self-efficacy and positive coping style, respectively, mediate the relationship between teacher support, parental support, peer support, and physical education learning motivation. Therefore, in the process of physical education teaching, self-efficacy and coping style mediate the relationship between multiple supports and physical education learning motivation. Hypotheses 2 and 3 are supported. Lastly, the study validated three specific chain-mediated paths: TES → Se → PCS → LM, PAS → Se → PCS → LM, and PES → Se → PCS → LM. Hypothesis 4 is supported.
Table 4
Table 4. Results of the mediation effect test.
3.3 fsQCA results
3.3.1 Calibrations
The data was calibrated so that the membership scores for each variable fell between 0 and 1, facilitating statistical analysis of configurational consistency and coverage. Since all scales used in this study were based on a Likert five-point scale, a direct calibration method was employed. Level 5 is set as complete membership, level 1 is set as complete non-membership, and level 3 is set as the crossover point for calibration analysis.
3.3.2 Necessary condition analysis
According to Ragin’s (2008) recommendation, a condition variable is considered a necessary condition that can independently explain the outcome variable when its consistency level exceeds 0.9. The analysis results, as shown in Table 5, reveal that when physical education learning motivation (LM) is taken as the outcome variable, only self-efficacy (Se) qualifies as a necessary condition for enhancing physical education learning motivation; the remaining condition variables are not necessary conditions. However, the consistency levels of most condition variables are very close to 0.9, indicating the reasonableness of the earlier variable selection and hypotheses. When non-physical education learning motivation (~Se) is the outcome variable, all condition variables exhibit consistency levels below 0.9, signifying that these conditions are not independent necessary conditions for explaining non-physical education learning motivation. Additionally, the majority of condition variables have coverage values exceeding 0.6, suggesting a certain degree of influence on the outcome variable. Consequently, the next step involves exploring the configurations generated by different combinations of condition variables.
Table 5
Table 5. Result of necessary condition analysis.
3.3.3 Sufficiency analysis
Combining previous research and considering the specific circumstances of this study, we set the consistency threshold at 0.8, PRI threshold at 0.7, and frequency threshold at 1 to construct the truth table, following standards from Fiss (2011) and Thiem (2017). This process yielded complex solutions, intermediate solutions, and simple solutions. Given that the complex solutions and intermediate solutions were consistent, this study primarily focuses on intermediate solutions, with simple solutions as supplementary, to identify core and marginal conditions. The configuration analysis results, as shown in Table 6, revealed three key findings: (1) LM1, LM2, and LM3 configurations correspond to three unique chain-mediated pathways identified in the SEM analysis, thus validating each other and enhancing the credibility of the research findings. (2) The LM1, LM2, and LM3 configurations also indicate that when self-efficacy and positive coping style simultaneously appear as core conditions, meeting any of teacher support, parental support, or peer support is sufficient to achieve a significant mechanism for high physical education learning motivation. (3) The LM4 and LM5 configurations demonstrate that when teacher support, parental support, and peer support all appear as core conditions, meeting either self-efficacy or positive coping style is adequate to achieve a significant mechanism for high physical education learning motivation.
Table 6
Table 6. Result of configuration analysis.
4 Discussion
This study explored the relationships between perceived multiple support, self-efficacy, coping style, and physical education learning motivation among university students during physical education instruction. The results indicated that multiple support not only directly influences students’ motivation for physical education learning but also exerts an indirect effect through self-efficacy and positive coping style. Additionally, there exists a complex non-linear configurational relationship among multiple support, self-efficacy, positive coping style, and physical education learning motivation. This section will summarize these findings and discuss them in conjunction with existing literature.
First, the findings of this study indicate that multiple support from PE teachers, parents, and peers positively influences university students’ motivation for physical education learning. This is consistent with the results of Ruzek et al. (2016), Warburton (2017), and Qurban et al. (2019), who found a significant positive association between multiple support from PE teachers, parents, and peers and university students’ motivation for physical education learning. Timely academic and emotional feedback from teachers and peers can directly or indirectly enhance students’ willingness to engage in learning activities (Nelson and DeBacker, 2008; Ruzek et al., 2016; Sadoughi and Hejazi, 2021; Jane, 2014). Notably, this study found that peer support (β = 0.237) had a greater impact on individual physical education learning motivation than teacher support (β = 0.132). This can be attributed to the fact that university students, unlike middle or high school students, spend less time interacting with teachers and more time living with their peers, leading to a greater influence from peer support. Additionally, parental support is also a significant factor in enhancing individual motivation for physical education learning. Research has shown that parental support is a crucial factor influencing the intention of adolescents, including university students, to engage in physical exercise (Fredricks and Eccles, 2004). Classic studies have demonstrated that parent–child interactions shape their initial motivation and values toward participating in physical activities (Harter, 1982; Bandura, 1986). Recent studies have validated that both tangible and intangible support provided by parents can significantly enhance students’ motivation for participation in physical education learning (Qurban et al., 2019). In summary, multiple support from PE teachers, parents, and peers positively influences university students’ motivation for physical education learning in various ways.
Second, the results of this study indicate that self-efficacy plays a mediating role between multiple support and physical education learning motivation. Perceived multiple support not only directly predicts students’ physical education learning motivation but also indirectly influences it through self-efficacy. According to self-determination theory, every individual has three psychological needs: autonomy, relatedness, and competence. When these basic psychological needs are met, both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are enhanced (Deci and Ryan, 2000). The supportive behaviors of teachers, parents, and peers, along with heightened self-efficacy, fulfill students’ needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence, thereby enhancing their physical education learning motivation (Jin and Wang, 2019; Tang and He, 2023). Previous studies have also demonstrated that when students receive support from teachers, parents, and peers, their self-efficacy significantly increases, leading to greater focus on classroom learning (Tang and He, 2023). Specifically, the more positive support students receive from various sources, the higher their learning motivation is likely to be. Therefore, in the context of physical education, teachers should play a primary role in creating a positive teaching atmosphere by providing more guidance and emotional support. Additionally, they should help students establish good peer relationships and encourage parents to communicate with their children, fulfilling students’ basic psychological needs. This approach can stimulate strong motivation and intention for learning in physical education.
Third, coping style serve as a crucial mediating variable in the complex relationship between multiple support and physical education learning motivation. This study finds that support from teachers, parents, and peers significantly positively influences students’ motivation to learn in physical education. And, this influence is also mediated by positive coping style. This suggests that multiple supports from various sources are more conducive to the development of positive coping styles and mindsets among students, making them more willing to find more effective learning solutions to overcome current discomforts in the face of academic difficulties and setbacks (Hou et al., 2024). In contrast, students who perceive low levels of support often adopt negative coping style, tending to avoid challenges in life or academics (Cherkil et al., 2013). This avoidance leads to the accumulation of negative emotions, a significant decrease in learning motivation, and ultimately, a sense of aversion to studying (Qu et al., 2023). Furthermore, consistently using negative coping style and accumulating negative emotions can result in conflicts and confrontations with teachers and peers (Henderson et al., 2003), severely impacting student-teacher and peer relationships, and consequently decreasing learning motivation (Shen et al., 2021). To sum up, in the process of physical education learning, active coping style is particularly important. It plays a mediating role between multiple supports and physical education learning motivation.
Fourth, the results of this study indicate that self-efficacy has a significant positive impact on positive coping style (Jex et al., 2001; Konaszewski et al., 2021). Furthermore, self-efficacy and positive coping style act as a chain mediator between multiple sources of support and learning motivation in physical education. During the learning process of physical education courses, it is inevitable for some university students to encounter academic challenges and pressure. Research has shown that students with higher self-efficacy are more likely to adopt positive coping style to learn and find other ways to handle stressful events and problems, thereby possessing stronger learning motivation (Ma et al., 2022). Other studies also suggest that multiple sources of support from teachers, parents, and peers influence individuals’ self-efficacy, encouraging them to handle difficulties more actively and thereby enhancing their learning motivation (Struthers et al., 2000). This study confirms these findings. In summary, multiple support can significantly predict the level of self-efficacy, and self-efficacy can influence physical education learning motivation through positive coping style.
Fifth, previous research has primarily focused on identifying the symmetrical relationships among multiple sources of support, self-efficacy, coping style, and learning motivation. In contrast, this study employs fsQCA analysis, providing an in-depth interpretation of the asymmetrical and complex interrelationships between these variables. By demonstrating that the combination of multiple support, self-efficacy, and coping style can enhance students’ motivation for physical education, this study introduces complexity theory and methodology into the field of sports education research for the first time (Woodside, 2014; Pappas, 2019; De et al., 2020). Moreover, it reveals alternative configurations of multiple support, self-efficacy, and coping style that influence students’ motivation for physical education. These configurations can explain equifinality, verifying and complementing the results of linear analyses.
5 Research limitations and future directions
Although this study provides a reference for improving students’ learning motivation in the process of physical education teaching, there are still certain limitations, and future research will make relevant expansions. First, this study focuses on Chinese university students, examining the relationships between multiple support, self-efficacy, coping style, and physical education learning motivation. Future research could adopt different methodologies and expand sample sizes to include more diverse populations and cultural contexts, thereby testing the reliability and generalizability of the findings. Second, while this study identifies self-efficacy and coping style as mediating variables, they represent only a fraction of potential mediators. Future research should aim to identify and test other potential mediating variables, which would significantly enrich the current findings. Third, due to the limited conditions for conducting research, a convenient sampling method was used for the cross-sectional questionnaire survey, so this study did not provide evidence for the time sequence or causal relationship. Therefore, the results of this study should be generalized with caution. Future research can find a batch of specific experimental subjects and overcome this limitation through longitudinal survey experiments.
6 Conclusion
The findings indicate that support from PE teachers, parents, and peers can directly influence students’ physical education learning motivation. Furthermore, these sources of support can indirectly predict students’ physical education learning motivation through the independent and chain mediating effects of self-efficacy and coping style. Additionally, this study has clarified the complex configurational relationships among multiple support, self-efficacy, coping style, and learning motivation, thereby verifying and complementing the results of linear analyses.
To enhance students’ learning motivation in physical education, it is essential to consider positive support from various sources, prove individual self-efficacy, and encourage students to adopt proactive measures to solve problems. This approach not only fosters students’ enthusiasm for learning but also helps in developing their positive, optimistic, and autonomous characteristics, which are beneficial for their sustainable development.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Ethics statement
Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent from the patients/participants or patients/participants’ legal guardian/next of kin was not required to participate in this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.
Author contributions
HH: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. QZ: Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft. CF: Conceptualization, Investigation, Visualization, Writing – original draft.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. The design of the study and collection, analysis were supported by National Key Research and Development Program [2020YFC2006804] and Shandong Provincial Social Science Planning Research Project [23BTYJ01].
Conflict of interest
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.
The reviewer GS declared a shared affiliation with the authors HH and QZ to the handling Editor at the time of the review.
Publisher’s note
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.
References
Afonso, C., Silva, G. M., Gonçalves, H. M., and Duarte, M. (2018). The role of motivations and involvement in wine tourists’ intention to return: SEM and fsQCA findings. J. Bus. Res. 89, 313–321. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.042
Alivernini, F., and Lucidi, F. (2011). Relationship between social context, self-efficacy, motivation, academic achievement, and intention to drop out of high school: a longitudinal study. J. Educ. Res. 104, 241–252. doi: 10.1080/00220671003728062
Altermatt, E. R., and Pomerantz, E. M. (2003). The development of competence-related and motivational beliefs: An investigation of similarity and influence among friends. J. Educ. Psychol. 95, 111–123. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.111
An, F., Yu, J., and Xi, L. (2022). Relationship between perceived teacher support and learning engagement among adolescents: mediation role of technology acceptance and learning motivation. Front. Psychol. 13:2464. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.992464
Anam, S., and Stracke, E. (2016). Language learning strategies of Indonesian primary school students: in relation to self-efficacy beliefs. System 60, 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2016.05.001
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol. Rev. 84, 191–215. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, US: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. Am. Psychol. 44, 1175–1184. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.44.9.1175
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 52, 1–26. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A., and Locke, E. A. (2003). Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 87–99. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.87
Barkoukis, V., Hagger, M. S., Lambropoulos, G., and Tsorbatzoudis, H. (2010). Extending the trans-contextual model in physical education and leisure-time contexts: examining the role of basic psychological need satisfaction. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 80, 647–670. doi: 10.1348/000709910X487023
Beets, M. W., Vogel, R., Forlaw, L., Pitetti, K. H., and Cardinal, B. J. (2006). Social support and youth physical activity: the role of provider and type. Am. J. Health Behav. 30, 278–289. doi: 10.5555/ajhb.2006.30.3.278
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. Am. Psychol. 32, 513–531. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513
Cetin-Dindar, A. (2016). Student motivation in constructivist learning environment. EURASIA J. Mathemat. Sci. Technol. Educ. 12, 233–247. doi: 10.12973/eurasia.2016.1399a
Chang, Y.-C., and Tsai, Y.-T. (2022). The effect of university students’ emotional intelligence, learning motivation and self-efficacy on their academic achievement—online English courses. Front. Psychol. 13:818929. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.818929
Chen, X., Liu, T., Luo, J., and Ren, S. (2020). Data for teenagers’ stressor, mental health, coping style, social support, parenting style and self-efficacy in South China. Data Brief 29:105202. doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2020.105202
Chen, H., Sun, H., and Dai, J. (2017). Peer support and adolescents’ physical activity: the mediating roles of self-efficacy and enjoyment. J. Pediatr. Psychol. 42, 569–577. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsw103
Cherkil, S., Gardens, S. J., and Soman, D. K. (2013). Coping styles and its association with sources of stress in undergraduate medical students. Indian J. Psychol. Med. 35, 389–393. doi: 10.4103/0253-7176.122235
Chi, L., and Xin, Z. (2006). The measure of learning motivation and the relationship between it and self-efficacy of university students. Psychol. Dev. Educ. 22, 64–70.
Cox, A. E., Smith, A. L., and Williams, L. (2008). Change in physical education motivation and physical activity behavior during middle school. J. Adolesc. Health 43, 506–513. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.04.020
De, C. F., Nieto-García, M., Martinelli, E., and Pellegrini, D. (2020). The motives behind consumers’ intention to use peer-to-peer accommodation: an fsQCA application. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 32, 2969–2989. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-02-2020-0142
Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol. Inq. 11, 227–268. doi: 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., and Williams, G. C. (1996). Need satisfaction and the self-regulation of learning. Learn. Individ. Differ. 8, 165–183. doi: 10.1016/S1041-6080(96)90013-8
Edwardson, C. L., and Gorely, T. (2010). Parental influences on different types and intensities of physical activity in youth: a systematic review. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 11, 522–535. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.05.001
Fiss, P. C. (2011). Building better causal theories: a fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. AMJ 54, 393–420. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.60263120
Fredricks, J. A., and Eccles, J. S. (2004). “Parental influences on youth involvement in sports” in Developmental sport and exercise psychology: a lifespan perspective (ed.). M. R. Weiss (Morgantown, WV, US: Fitness Information Technology), 145–164.
Geng, Z., Ogbolu, Y., Wang, J., Hinds, P. S., Qian, H., and Yuan, C. (2018). Gauging the effects of self-efficacy, social support, and coping style on self-management behaviors in Chinese Cancer survivors. Cancer Nurs. 41, E1–E10. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000571
Gómez-Ortiz, O., Romera, E. M., and Ortega-Ruiz, R. (2016). Parenting styles and bullying. The mediating role of parental psychological aggression and physical punishment. Child Abuse Negl. 51, 132–143. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.10.025
Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., Culverhouse, T., and Biddle, S. J. H. (2003). The processes by which perceived autonomy support in physical education promotes leisure-time physical activity intentions and behavior: a trans-contextual model. J. Educ. Psychol. 95, 784–795. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.784
Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., Hein, V., Pihu, M., Soós, I., and Karsai, I. (2007). The perceived autonomy support scale for exercise settings (PASSES): development, validity, and cross-cultural invariance in young people. Psychol. Sport Exer. 8, 632–653. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2006.09.001
Harter, S. (1982). The perceived competence scale for children. Child Dev. 53, 87–97. doi: 10.2307/1129640
Helgeson, V. S., and Lopez, L. (2010). “Social support and growth following adversity” in Handbook of adult resilience J. W. Reich, A. J. Zautra, & J. S. Hall (eds.)(New York, NY, US: The Guilford Press), 309–330.
Henderson, E., Hogan, H., Grant, A., and Berlin, A. (2003). Conflict and coping strategies: a qualitative study of student attitudes to significant event analysis. Med. Educ. 37, 438–446. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2003.01490.x
Horn, T. S. (2004). “Developmental perspectives on self-perceptions in children and adolescents” in Developmental sport and exercise psychology: a lifespan perspective (Morgantown, WV, US: Fitness Information Technology), 101–143.
Hou, Y., Zhang, Y., Cao, X., Lei, G., and Liu, G. (2024). The association between perceived social support and resilience among Chinese university students: a moderated mediation model. Psychol. Sch. 61, 1474–1490. doi: 10.1002/pits.23122
Hsiao, S. C. (2021). Effects of the application of virtual reality to experiential education on self-efficacy and learning motivation of social workers. Front. Psychol. 12:481. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.770481
Hsu, Y.-W., Chou, C.-P., Nguyen-Rodriguez, S. T., McClain, A. D., Belcher, B. R., and Spruijt-Metz, D. (2011). Influences of social support, perceived barriers, and negative meanings of physical activity on physical activity in middle school students. J. Phys. Act. Health 8, 210–219. doi: 10.1123/jpah.8.2.210
Jex, S. M., Bliese, P. D., Buzzell, S., and Primeau, J. (2001). The impact of self-efficacy on stressor-strain relations: coping style as an explanatory mechanism. J. Appl. Psychol. 86, 401–409. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.401
Jin, G., and Wang, Y. (2019). The influence of gratitude on learning engagement among adolescents: the multiple mediating effects of teachers’ emotional support and students’ basic psychological needs. J. Adolesc. 77, 21–31. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.09.006
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Buckman, L. A., and Richards, P. S. (1985). The effect of prolonged implementation of cooperative learning on social support within the classroom. J. Psychol. 119, 405–411. doi: 10.1080/00223980.1985.10542911
Kindermann, T. A. (2007). Effects of naturally existing peer groups on changes in academic engagement in a cohort of sixth graders. Child Dev. 78, 1186–1203. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01060.x
Konaszewski, K., Kolemba, M., and Niesiobędzka, M. (2021). Resilience, sense of coherence and self-efficacy as predictors of stress coping style among university students. Curr. Psychol. 40, 4052–4062. doi: 10.1007/s12144-019-00363-1
Lazarus, R. S., and Folkman, S. (1987). Transactional theory and research on emotions and coping. Eur. J. Personal. 1, 141–169. doi: 10.1002/per.2410010304
Liu, Y., and Li, J. (2019). The influence of core self-evaluation environment on learning burnout of PE majors: the mediating effect of coping style. Ekoloji Dergisi 28, 2789–2795.
Liu, Q., Mo, L., Huang, X., Yu, L., and Liu, Y. (2020). Path analysis of the effects of social support, self-efficacy, and coping style on psychological stress in children with malignant tumor during treatment. Medicine 99:e22888. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000022888
Ma, H., Zou, J., Zhong, Y., Li, J., and He, J. (2022). Perceived stress, coping style and burnout of Chinese nursing students in late-stage clinical practice: a cross-sectional study. Nurse Educ. Pract. 62:103385. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2022.103385
Makara, K. A., and Madjar, N. (2015). The role of goal structures and peer climate in trajectories of social achievement goals during high school. Dev. Psychol. 51, 473–488. doi: 10.1037/a0038801
Mercer, S. H., Nellis, L. M., Martínez, R. S., and Kirk, M. (2011). Supporting the students most in need: academic self-efficacy and perceived teacher support in relation to within-year academic growth. J. Sch. Psychol. 49, 323–338. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2011.03.006
Nabizadeh, S., Hajian, S., Sheikhan, Z., and Rafiei, F. (2019). Prediction of academic achievement based on learning strategies and outcome expectations among medical students. BMC Med. Educ. 19:99. doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1527-9
Nattiv, A., Loucks, A. B., Manore, M. M., Sanborn, C. F., Sundgot-Borgen, J., Warren, M. P., et al. (2007). American College of Sports Medicine position stand. The female athlete triad. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 39, 1867–1882. doi: 10.1249/mss.0b013e318149f111
Nelson, R. M., and DeBacker, T. K. (2008). Achievement motivation in adolescents: the role of peer climate and best friends. J. Exp. Educ. 76, 170–189. doi: 10.3200/JEXE.76.2.170-190
Ober, T. M., Coggins, M. R., Rebouças-Ju, D., Suzuki, H., and Cheng, Y. (2021). Effect of teacher support on students’ math attitudes: measurement invariance and moderation of students’ background characteristics. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 66:101988. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.101988
Pan, X., and Shao, H. (2020). Teacher online feedback and learning motivation: learning engagement as a mediator. Soc. Behav. Pers. 48, 1–10. doi: 10.2224/sbp.9118
Pappas, N. (2019). The complexity of consumer experience formulation in the sharing economy. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 77, 415–424. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.08.005
Patrick, H., Ryan, A. M., and Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents’ perceptions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. J. Educ. Psychol. 99, 83–98. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.83
Pugliese, J., and Tinsley, B. (2007). Parental socialization of child and adolescent physical activity: a meta-analysis. J. Fam. Psychol. 21, 331–343. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.21.3.331
Qu, M., Wang, J., Yang, L., and Jin, T. (2023). Early peer aggression and non-suicidal self-injurious behaviour in adolescents: the role of rumination thinking and self-efficacy in managing negative emotions. Chin. J. Clin. Psych. 31:1421-1426+1460. doi: 10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2023.06.025
Qurban, H., Wang, J., Siddique, H., Morris, T., and Qiao, Z. (2019). The mediating role of parental support: the relation between sports participation, self-esteem, and motivation for sports among Chinese students. Curr. Psychol. 38, 308–319. doi: 10.1007/s12144-018-0016-3
Ragin, C. (2008). “Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond” in Bibliovault OAI repository (The University of Chicago Press).
Ruzek, E. A., Hafen, C. A., Allen, J. P., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. Y., and Pianta, R. C. (2016). How teacher emotional support motivates students: the mediating roles of perceived peer relatedness, autonomy support, and competence. Learn. Instr. 42, 95–103. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.004
Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55, 68–78. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York, NY, US: The Guilford Press.
Ryan, A. M., and Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. Am. Educ. Res. J. 38, 437–460. doi: 10.3102/00028312038002437
Ryan, A. M., and Shim, S. S. (2012). Changes in help seeking from peers during early adolescence: associations with changes in achievement and perceptions of teachers. J. Educ. Psychol. 104, 1122–1134. doi: 10.1037/a0027696
Sadoughi, M., and Hejazi, S. Y. (2021). Teacher support and academic engagement among EFL learners: the role of positive academic emotions. Stud. Educ. Eval. 70:101060. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101060
Sallis, J. F., Grossman, R. M., Pinski, R. B., Patterson, T. L., and Nader, P. R. (1987). The development of scales to measure social support for diet and exercise behaviors. Prev. Med. 16, 825–836. doi: 10.1016/0091-7435(87)90022-3
Schwarzer, R., Bäßler, J., Kwiatek, P., Schröder, K., and Zhang, J. X. (1997). The assessment of optimistic self-beliefs: comparison of the German, Spanish, and Chinese versions of the general self-efficacy scale. Appl. Psychol. Int. Rev. 46, 69–88. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.1997.tb01096.x
Shen, M., Che, S., Ye, D., Li, Y., Lin, F., and Zhang, Y. (2021). Effects of backward walking on knee proprioception after ACL reconstruction. Physiother. Theory Pract. 37, 1109–1116. doi: 10.1080/09593985.2019.1681040
Shin, H., and Ryan, A. M. (2014). Friendship networks and achievement goals: an examination of selection and influence processes and variations by gender. J Youth Adolesc. 43, 1453–1464. doi: 10.1007/s10964-014-0132-9
Standage, M., Gillison, F. B., Ntoumanis, N., and Treasure, D. C. (2012). Predicting students’ physical activity and health-related well-being: a prospective cross-domain investigation of motivation across school physical education and exercise settings. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 34, 37–60. doi: 10.1123/jsep.34.1.37
Struthers, C. W., Perry, R. P., and Menec, V. H. (2000). An examination of the relationship among academic stress, coping, motivation, and performance in college. Res. High. Educ. 41, 581–592. doi: 10.1023/A:1007094931292
Tada, A. (2017). The associations among psychological distress, coping style, and health habits in Japanese nursing students: a cross-sectional study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 14:1434. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14111434
Tang, Y., and He, W. (2023). Relationship between emotional intelligence and learning motivation among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic: a serial mediation model. Front. Psychol. 14:9569. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1109569
Thiem, A. (2017). Conducting configurational comparative research with qualitative comparative analysis: a hands-on tutorial for applied evaluation scholars and practitioners. Am. J. Eval. 38, 420–433. doi: 10.1177/1098214016673902
Tranquillo, J., and Stecker, M. (2016). Using intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in continuing professional education. Surg. Neurol. Int. 7, 197–199. doi: 10.4103/2152-7806.179231
Trost, S. G., and Loprinzi, P. D. (2011). Parental influences on physical activity behavior in children and adolescents: a brief review. Am. J. Lifestyle Med. 5, 171–181. doi: 10.1177/1559827610387236
Vasques, C., Magalhães, P., Cortinhas, A., Mota, P., Leitão, J., and Lopes, V. P. (2014). Effects of intervention programs on child and adolescent BMI: a meta-analysis study. J. Phys. Act. Health 11, 426–444. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2012-0035
Warburton, V. E. (2017). Peer and teacher influences on the motivational climate in physical education: a longitudinal perspective on achievement goal adoption. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 51, 303–314. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.08.001
Wentzel, K. R. (1999). Social-motivational processes and interpersonal relationships: implications for understanding motivation at school. J. Educ. Psychol. 91, 76–97. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.91.1.76
Wentzel, K. R. (2017). “Peer relationships, motivation, and academic performance at school” in Handbook of competence and motivation: theory and application. 2nd ed C. S. Dweck, & D. S. Yeager (New York, NY, US: The Guilford Press), 586–603.
Wentzel, K., Russell, S., and Baker, S. (2014). “Peer relationships and positive adjustment at school” in Handbook of positive psychology in schools. 2nd ed (New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group), 260–277.
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
Woodside, A. G. (2014). Embrace perform model: complexity theory, contrarian case analysis, and multiple realities. J. Bus. Res. 67, 2495–2503. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.07.006
Wu, H., Li, S., Zheng, J., and Guo, J. (2020). Medical students’ motivation and academic performance: the mediating roles of self-efficacy and learning engagement. Med. Educ. Online 25:1742964. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2020.1742964
Xie, Y. (1998). Reliability and validity of the simplified coping style questionnaire. Chin. J. Clin. Psych. 6, 114–115.
Zhang, G., and Chen, C. (2021). A study on the relationship between learning motivation and learning effectiveness of personnel based on innovation capability. Front. Psychol. 12:772904. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.772904
Keywords: multiple supports, learning motivation, self-efficacy, coping style, SEM, fsQCA
Citation: Hao H, Zhu Q and Feng C (2025) The impact of multiple supports on university students’ physical education learning motivation: a dual analysis based on SEM and fsQCA. Front. Psychol. 16:1446317. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1446317
Edited by:
David Manzano Sánchez, University of Almeria, SpainReviewed by:
Guoxiao Sun, Shandong University, ChinaFrancisco Serrano Romero, Manukau Institute of Technology, New Zealand
Istvan Soos, Hungarian University of Sports Science, Hungary
Copyright © 2025 Hao, Zhu and Feng. 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) and the copyright owner(s) 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: Huaixia Hao, c2RkeGhoeDkwNjJAMTYzLmNvbQ==