Revisiting after-class boredom via exploratory structural equation modeling


Pawlak M., SOLHİ M., Elahi Shirvan M., Kruk M., Taherian T.

IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 2023 (SSCI) identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Publication Date: 2023
  • Doi Number: 10.1515/iral-2022-0151
  • Journal Name: IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching
  • Journal Indexes: Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, FRANCIS, IBZ Online, International Bibliography of Social Sciences, Periodicals Index Online, Communication & Mass Media Index, EBSCO Education Source, Education Abstracts, Educational research abstracts (ERA), Index Islamicus, Linguistic Bibliography, Linguistics & Language Behavior Abstracts, MLA - Modern Language Association Database
  • Keywords: bifactor ESEM, BLEOS, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), construct validity, exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM)
  • Istanbul Medipol University Affiliated: Yes

Abstract

Boredom has recently become the subject of inquiry in L2 studies, which has resulted, among others, in the development and validation of several boredom-measuring scales, mostly through exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). However, such analytical procedures are not free from limitations and exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) can be applied to overcome them. CFA has also been used to validate the Boredom in Learning English Outside of School Questionnaire (BLEOS), an instrument which taps into recently conceptualized after-class boredom, revealing the extent to which students are likely to feel bored when they attempt to practice the target language outside the classroom as well as factors underpinning this negative emotion in such contexts. The present study sought to revisit the BLEOS scale to determine (1) whether the factor structure of the BLEOS is supported by ESEM and bifactor ESEM, (2) how stable the results are across gender, and (3) the criterion-related validity of the BLEOS scale. In doing so, the CFA and ESEM models (i.e., standard and bifactor CFA as well as standard and bifactor ESEM models) were compared to identify which model(s) would exhibit better fit indices for the measure in question. A total of 433 students majoring in English, 120 males and 313 females, participated in this study. It was revealed that while the CFA model provided an inflated factor correlation and unacceptable model fit to the data, ESEM (especially bifactor ESEM) indicated a realistic representation of the data with a good fit. The bi-factor ESEM model of the BLEOS turned out to be stable across gender. Finally, the structural bifactor ESEM model of BLEOS proved to explain learning outcomes modestly.