ArticleBMC psychology2026
Factors influencing the college students' effectiveness in discipline competitions: an integrated analysis from SEM and FsQCA.
Article in BMC psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiscipline competitions play an important role in higher education, as they drive innovation. Despite recognition of their educational value, little is known about the psychological mechanisms that determine students’ efficacy in these settings. The relationship between internal cognitive effects and outside help needs further study.
methodsThis study developed the model based on an extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 framework with self-efficacy theory. Perceived instructor support and self-efficacy were included in the model as key predictors. An online questionnaire was administered to 506 Chinese university students with competition experience. The model was tested using Covariance-Based Structural Equation Modeling. Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis was used to identify pathways within the complex set of causes leading to high effectiveness.
resultsThe results of the CB-SEM analysis indicate that performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions significantly enhanced competition intention. In addition, competition intention had a strong positive impact on competition effectiveness (β = 0.429, p < 0.001). Self-efficacy and perceived instructor support also proved direct, significant positive predictors of effectiveness (β = 0.227, p < 0.001; β = 0.131, p = 0.013). The fsQCA revealed three distinct yet equal paths to high effectiveness: the Motivation-Support pathway, the Social-Driven pathway, and the Resource-Guided pathway.
conclusionsAs per the findings, competition intention acts as a mediator for self-efficacy, which is a vital resource of the mind. Their results show that effectiveness is not the product of one variable, but rather specific combinations of motivational, social, and resource-based conditions. This research offers a sophisticated psychological understanding of competitive performance outcomes based on evidence from successful competitors. Its completion has implications for educators to tailor mechanisms of support and develops agency. Competitors, the bid team, and their tailor have implications for a wide range of students.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.