Fathi Et Al 2023 Modelling Boredom in The Efl Context An Investigation of The Role of Coping Self Efficacy Mindfulness

1182176
research-article2023
LTR0010.1177/13621688231182176Language Teaching ResearchFathi et al.
LANGUAGE
TEACHING
Article RESEARCH
Language Teaching Research
Modelling boredom in the EFL

1–31
© The Author(s) 2023
Article reuse guidelines:
context: An investigation of sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/13621688231182176
https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688231182176
the role of coping self-efficacy, journals.sagepub.com/home/ltr
mindfulness, and foreign

language enjoyment
Jalil Fathi
University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran
Mirosław Pawlak
Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland; University of Applied Sciences, Konin, Poland
Mariusz Kruk
University of Zielona Góra, Poland
Milad Naderi
University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran
Abstract
The aim of this study was to test a model of second language (L2) boredom based on coping
self-efficacy (CSE), foreign language enjoyment (FLE), and mindfulness among English as a
foreign language (EFL) learners. In so doing, 456 EFL learners from Iran took part in this study
by completing an online survey which included scales tapping into the four latent constructs
under investigation. Two-step structural equation modelling was utilized to analyse the data
and examine the associations among the constructs. Results revealed that CSE and mindfulness
positively affected FLE. Also, FLE was a direct negative predictor of L2 boredom. Concerning
the mediation hypotheses, FLE was found to fully mediate the effect of mindfulness on boredom.
However, FLE was a partial mediator between CSE and boredom. These findings provide a basis
for important implications for L2 research and practice.
Corresponding author:
Jalil Fathi, Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics, Department of English and Linguistics, Faculty of
Language and Literature, University of Kurdistan, Kurdistan Province, Pasdaran street, Sanandaj, 66714, Iran
Email: j.fathi@uok.ac.ir
2 Language Teaching Research 00(0)
Keywords
coping self-efficacy, FLE, L2 boredom, L2 contexts, mindfulness
I Introduction
The last few decades have witnessed a growing interest in psychological factors (i.e.
emotions) in the field of second and foreign language (L2) learning and teaching (C. Li
& Wei, 2023). Given the fact that language learning is an emotional endeavor (Plonsky
et al., 2022), there is a longstanding tradition of research on emotions in L2 education
(e.g. Dewaele et al., 2018; C. Li, 2020; Piniel & Albert, 2018; Shao et al., 2020).
Moreover, studies have shown that emotions are of considerable importance in the field
of second language acquisition (SLA) (Dewaele & Li, 2020), as they play a pivotal role
in the process of L2 learning and use (Shao et al., 2019).
Boredom is one of such emotions which has long been recognized as a common nega-
tive psychological state experienced by students (Eren & Coskun, 2016; Kruk et al.,
2021; V. Tze et al., 2016). As one of the most frequently experienced emotions in school
(Pekrun et al., 2010), boredom is a negative emotional or psychological experience that
prevents individuals from staying focused on and engaging in learning tasks (Eastwood
et al., 2012; Macklem, 2015). Boredom is an amalgam of disengagement, dissatisfaction,
disappointment, lack of motivation and attention in pursuit of one’s goals (Kruk &
Zawodniak, 2018), which, if ignored, can lead to inaction and depression (Macklem,
2015). Moreover, given that it is not as disruptive as anxiety (M. C. Tze, 2011), boredom
is often neglected by foreign language (FL) teachers (Pawlak, Zawodniak & Kruk, 2020),
which can result in inhibiting the L2 learning process (C. Li et al., 2023; Pawlak, Kruk,
et al., 2020). Therefore, efforts should be made to investigate boredom and its anteced-
ents with a view to alleviating its pernicious effects in L2 classrooms. Accordingly,
researchers have recently addressed L2 boredom and its precursors in a variety of con-
texts (e.g. Derakhshan et al., 2021; Dewaele et al., 2023; C. Li, 2021; Pawlak, Kruk,
et al., 2020). The empirical evidence accumulated so far indicates that that there are a
number of reasons why individuals might succumb to boredom when learning a foreign
language, such as, for example, lack of enjoyment in performing L2 learning tasks (C.
Li, 2022; C. Li & Wei, 2023; Kruk et al., 2022).
In line with the recent shift of emphasis from negative emotions to positive emotions
in educational psychology (Kristjánsson, 2012), triggered by the recognition of the ten-
ets of positive psychology (PP) in applied linguistics (C. Li, 2020), emphasis has
recently been placed on the positive emotions experienced by L2 learners (C. Li et al.,
2018). This has resulted in a more holistic view of affect in which both negative and
positive emotions are considered as prime motives of language learning (MacIntyre &
Vincze, 2017). Furthermore, in this holistic approach, scholars no longer view positive
emotions as the mere flip side of negative emotions, but as independent variables
(Resnik & Dewaele, 2020; Shao et al., 2020). Being the two academic emotions that are
the most frequently experienced by learners (Goetz et al., 2007), enjoyment and bore-
dom are significant psychological constructs, and thus understanding their interconnec-
tions can be conducive to successful learning (Pekrun et al., 2017), especially in the FL
learning context (C. Li & Wei, 2023). Moreover, positive emotions such as foreign
Fathi et al. 3
language enjoyment (FLE) can not only contribute to L2 learning (Botes et al., 2021;
Dewaele & MacIntyre, 2016; Jin & Zhang, 2021), but they can also to some extent
reduce the consequences of negative emotional reactions involved in L2 learning (C. Li,
2022). Specifically, the construct of FLE has been shown to have a key role in the pre-
vention and reduction of disruptive effects of boredom in FL classrooms (Kruk et al.,
2022; C. Li, 2022).
Although well-recognized and researched in educational psychology (C. Li et al.,
2023), boredom still remains an often-overlooked research area in the field of English as
a foreign language (EFL) (Pawlak, Zawodniak & Kruk, 2020). Furthermore, since bore-
dom is less noticeable than other emotions (i.e. anxiety or anger) (Coşkun & Yüksel,
2022), the empirical evidence concerning this aversive emotional state is still fairly lim-
ited in L2 contexts (C. Li & Dewaele, 2020; Pawlak, Kruk, et al., 2020). Therefore, the
investigation of boredom is vital for successful L2 learning because misconceptions in
this area may diminish the effectiveness of L2 instruction (Zawodniak et al., 2017).
Accordingly, a number of recent studies have addressed boredom in EFL contexts (e.g.
Derakhshan et al., 2022; C. Li et al., 2023; Pawlak, Kruk, et al., 2020; Pawlak et al.,
2022; L. J. Zhang et al., 2022), but research on its nature, antecedents, and outcomes
surely needs to be further extended, in particular by taking into account other individual
difference (ID) factors. The present study seeks to address this gap by investigating the
concept of boredom and its potential predictors in L2 learning. Specifically, we explored
the extent to which boredom is predicted by L2 learners’ mindfulness and coping self-
efficacy (CSE), also taking into account the mediating effects of FLE.
II Literature review
1 Theoretical framework
a Broaden-and-Build Theory. With the introduction of PP, the past decade has wit-
nessed a positive renaissance in SLA research (MacIntyre & Gregersen, 2012). One
leading foundation theory for this so-called ‘renaissance’ is the Broaden-and-Build
Theory (Fredrickson, 2001, 2003), in which it is maintained that ‘positive emotions,
including joy, interest, contentment, pride, and love, although phenomenologically dis-
tinct, all share the ability to broaden people’s momentary thought–action repertoires
and build their enduring personal resources, ranging from physical and intellectual
resources to social and psychological resources’ (Fredrickson, 2001, p. 219). Put differ-
ently, based on this theory, positive emotions (i.e. FLE) can prepare learners to effec-
tively deal with or regulate their negative emotions (i.e. boredom). While positive
emotions can broaden L2 learners’ perspectives and promote their language outcomes,
negative emotions tend to hinder the optimal learning potential of L2 learners and
restrict their focus (Guo & Qiu, 2021; Yu, 2021). Given the added value of these insights
to a new wave of emotion studies in the L2 context, SLA researchers have tried to
examine a wider spectrum of emotions (i.e. FLE, pride, hope, shame, and boredom)
rather than solely focusing on anxiety (Davari et al., 2020; C. Li et al., 2023). Conse-
quently, there has been a growing body of literature recently intended to shed more light
on the relationship between boredom and positive emotions of EFL learners (e.g.
Dewaele & Li, 2021; C. Li, 2022; L. J. Zhang et al., 2022).
b Control-Value Theory of achievement emotions. In addition to Broaden-and-Build The-

ory, we draw upon the Control-Value Theory (Pekrun, 2006), which offers a conceptual
framework to identify the origins, precursors, and results of achievement emotions (i.e.
FLE, boredom). This theory has provided theoretical and epistemological foundation
for many L2 emotion studies (C. Li, 2021). According to this theory, a three-dimension
taxonomy conceptualizes achievement emotions: object focus, valence, and activation.
Object focus differentiates activity-related emotions such as enjoyment and boredom
from outcome-related emotions like anxiety and hope. Valence has to do with positive
emotions (i.e. enjoyment, satisfaction) and negative emotions (i.e. anxiety, stress). Acti-
vation refers to the differentiation of physiologically activating emotions, such as
enjoyment and anxiety, and deactivating emotions, such as boredom and relaxation
(Pekrun et al., 2011). As Pekrun and Perry (2014) suggest, in line with the Control-
Value Theory, achievement emotions can have significant effects for the learning pro-
cess and achievement. This theory has been utilized to explore the link between
achievement emotions and their antecedents or effects. For instance, investigating the
enjoyment experiences of FL learners, Piechurska-Kuciel (2017) indicated that learn-
ers’ enjoyment is ascribed to their language achievement, which is linked to proximal
antecedents of achievement emotions, namely, control and value appraisals. C. Li
(2021) reported that appraisals of perceived control and value had a negative predictive
role in affecting boredom.
This having been said, little empirical research has been undertaken regarding achieve-
ment emotions, their antecedents, and outcomes particularly in the EFL context. In addi-
tion, to the best of our knowledge, few if any previous studies have included mindfulness
and CSE as antecedents of achievement emotions, namely FLE and boredom.
2 L2 boredom
Boredom, a complex and multifaceted construct (Pawlak et al., 2022), is an unpleasant
emotional experience which is recognized as an ‘affective indicator of unsuccessful
attentional engagement in valued goal-congruent activity’ (Westgate & Wilson, 2018,
p. 690). Accompanied by a sense of emptiness and aimlessness (Eastwood et al., 2012),
boredom is a negative psychological state resulting from one’s perception of the learning
environment (Weinerman & Kenner, 2016), which leads to disengagement and avoid-
ance behaviors (Kruk & Zawodniak, 2020). While motivated learners effectively partici-
pate in assigned tasks and activities, those manifesting boredom are apathetic towards
the learning process, and thus they struggle to stay focused on what transpires in the
classroom (Preckel et al., 2010). Individuals who suffer from boredom are likely to expe-
rience various consequences: cognitive (e.g. the feeling of time slowing down), affective
(e.g. feelings of discomfort and aversive reactions), expressive (e.g. vocal, facial, and
postural signs of boredom), motivational (e.g. the desire to change the activity or to leave
the situation), and physiological (e.g. decreased arousal) (Nett et al., 2010).
There exist various causal mechanisms of boredom which can be discussed in terms
of a number of models and theories. First, the under-stimulation model (Larson &
Richards, 1991) posits that students suffer from boredom due to the scarcity of new
stimuli as well as repetitive and unchallenging activities leading to disengagement.
Fathi et al. 5
Second, the forced-effort model (Hill & Perkins, 1985) pertains to situations when learn-
ers find teacher-imposed activities monotonous and complex, realizing that they are not
in control of their own learning. Third, the Control-Value Theory of achievement emo-
tions, discussed in more detail above, (Pekrun, 2006) posits that students may attach little
value to activities when they perceive low subjective control over tasks that exceed their
abilities. For example, Niculescu et al.’s (2016) study indicated that students’ reduction
of perceived control over and value of the tasks leads to an increase in their boredom.
Fourth, the attentional theory of boredom proneness (Fahlman et al., 2013) concerns situ-
ations in which students exhibit poor attentional control and are unable to sustain atten-
tion. Fifth, the emotion theory (Eastwood et al., 2007) is based on the assumption that
students who have difficulty in identifying, understanding, and communicating their own
emotions are more likely to get bored.
Much of the recent research on boredom and its antecedents has been conducted out-
side of the field of SLA (e.g. Bench & Lench, 2019; Mikulas & Vodanovich, 1993; Sharp
et al., 2020). However, in recent years the construct of boredom has also made its way
into research into L2 learning and teaching. For example, drawing on the Control-Value
Theory (Pekrun, 2006), C. Li et al. (2023) recruited Chinese EFL students and teachers,
conceptualizing foreign language learning boredom (FLLB) as a |three-dimensional
achievement emotion, including valence, arousal, and object focus. Also, based on data
collected from 314 Chinese college students, Wang and Xu (2021) found that boredom
constituted two interacting dimensions, namely state and trait. They also reported that
state boredom significantly affected L2 learning, whereas trait boredom did not have any
substantial impact on it. Examining the diaries of English philology students, Zawodniak
et al. (2017) came to the conclusion that factors such as language activities, lesson prepa-
ration, and teacher behavior had an important role in evoking boredom. In another study
in the Polish context, Pawlak, Kruk, et al. (2020) uncovered two distinct factors underly-
ing boredom in English classes, that is, disengagement, monotony and repetitiveness,
and lack of satisfaction and challenge. In a mixed-methods study, C. Li (2021) examined
control-value appraisals as precursors of boredom in the Chinese EFL context. Findings
demonstrated that the more learners felt competent in EFL classrooms, the less boredom
they experienced. It was also confirmed that competent learners attached more value to
learning English, which, in turn, made them immune to the disruptive effects of bore-
dom. Derakhshan et al. (2021) reported that long and monotonous monologues of teach-
ers, lack of student participation, logistical problems, and haphazardly selected, repetitive
tasks were the major antecedents of boredom among Iranian EFL students.
As illustrated above, the empirical evidence concerning L2 boredom points to a wide
array of sources influencing this aversive emotion. However, the association of boredom
with positive emotions and other learner-related variables as well as the potential role
that such variables can play in alleviating the consequences of L2 boredom have remained
under-researched.
3 Mindfulness
Mindfulness is conceptualized as ‘the awareness that emerges through paying attention
on purpose, in the present moment, and non-judgmentally to the unfolding of experience
moment by moment’ (Kabat-Zinn, 2003, p. 145). Conceptualized as awareness of an

individual’s inner and outer worlds, mindfulness is a process of gaining insight into
thoughts, emotions, actions, or surroundings, especially at the present moment (Brown
& Ryan, 2004). Mindfulness is a state of mind that can be best described by the term
‘carpe diem’, that is, ‘being in the moment’. Even though mindfulness is associated with
concentration, they are in fact two distinct constructs (Dunn et al., 1999). This is because
concentration refers to a situation in which one’s attention is restricted to a single intero-
ceptive or exteroceptive object while ignoring other inputs, whereas mindfulness entails
voluntary and appropriate regulation of attention and awareness (see Brown et al., 2007).
Among others, mindfulness has been found to promote learners’ creative thinking, aca-
demic performance, and physiological/psychological well-being (Fallah, 2017;
Henriksen et al., 2020), and to reduce their levels of negative emotions, including anxi-
ety, stress, and boredom (Shearer et al., 2016). Based on the attentional theory of bore-
dom proneness, it is assumed that the cultivation of attention can minimize one’s
propensity to experience boredom (LePera, 2011). Mindfulness has also been reported to
be associated with enjoyment (Bóo et al., 2020; Langer et al., 1978; Thompson, 2009).
To date, the association between mindfulness and boredom has been investigated in a
number of studies in the field of psychology (e.g. Galla et al., 2020; Lee, 2017;
Waterschoot et al., 2021). Employing two psychometrically valid measures, namely the
Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) (Brown & Ryan, 2004) and the
Boredom Proneness Scale (BPS) (Farmer & Sundberg, 1986), LePera (2011) examined
the link between mindfulness and boredom proneness, as well as the association between
mindfulness and negative outcomes such as anxiety, depression, and substance use. The
findings demonstrated that boredom proneness was positively associated with these neg-
ative phenomena but negatively with mindfulness. Furthermore, mindfulness was nega-
tively associated with anxiety, depression, and substance use. In another study, Lee
(2017) reported that mindfulness was negatively correlated with boredom. It was also
found that depression, anxiety, and stress were positively associated with boredom
proneness and negatively related to mindfulness. Despite such empirical evidence, there
is a relatively small body of research that has directly investigated the relationship
between boredom and mindfulness in educational settings. Galla et al. (2020) indicated
that students with higher levels of mindfulness were more immune to boredom. Similarly,
Trunnell et al. (1996) demonstrated that students who were equipped with mindfulness
felt less bored and more engaged.
Although the construct of mindfulness and its relationship with boredom has been the
focus of some empirical investigations, mostly conducted within the field of educational
psychology, to the best of our knowledge, no study has investigated the link between the
two constructs in the area of SLA. With this gap in mind, in view of the salient influence
of mindfulness in alleviating negative effects of boredom (Koval & Todman, 2015), the
current study explored the predictive effects of mindfulness of the experience of boredom
in EFL contexts. As mentioned earlier, the attentional theory of boredom proneness argues
that students sustain a low level of self-awareness of attention and therefore find it hard to
focus on what is going on around them (LePera, 2011). At the same time, the concept of
mindfulness pertains to awareness that arises through paying attention to present events
and thus being cognizant of what is happening in the immediate environment (Baer, 2003;
Fathi et al. 7
Brown et al., 2007). This has led us to also examine the potentially influential role of
mindfulness in shaping L2 boredom, an objective that has not thus far been pursued in any
study in L2 contexts.
4 CSE
Coping pertains to ‘constantly changing cognitive and behavioral efforts to manage spe-
cific external and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceeding the
resources of the person’ (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984, p. 141). Commonly viewed in terms
of strategies and emotional responses, coping aims to solve a problem, cognitively re-
evaluate it, or minimize its consequences (Ritsner et al., 2003). It is argued that the
experience of boredom is an inherent and inevitable aspect of the learning process, espe-
cially when it comes to L2 learning (Kruk, 2021a). Importantly, it must be recognized
that learners do not only just experience boredom, but also utilize various strategies to
cope with this aversive emotion (Eren & Coskun, 2016). In fact, some previous research
has linked the use of coping strategies to students’ boredom. Nett et al. (2010) developed
the Boredom Coping Scale (BCS) to explore how individuals deal with experiences of
boredom. Four categories of boredom-related strategies were evaluated:
•• cognitive-approach, e.g. changing the perception of the situation by focusing on

the significance of learning;
•• behavioral-approach, e.g. changing the boring situation by asking the teacher for
alternate tasks;
•• cognitive-avoidance, e.g. forgetting about the boring class by thinking about
something more exciting; and
•• behavioral-avoidance, e.g. distracting oneself from boring situations by chatting
with classmates.
Based on the results, three distinct groups of students were recognized: reappraisers,
criticizers, and evaders (Nett et al., 2010). Reappraisers preferred cognitive-approach
strategies, they were less frequently bored, and attached more value to learning. By con-
trast, criticizers preferred behavioral-approach strategies, while evaders tended to rely on
both types of avoidance strategies. The results of the study conducted by Nett et al.
(2011) showed that coping strategies representing the cognitive-approach were associ-
ated with lower levels of boredom.
Not only is it important to identify boredom coping strategies, but also to explore the
construct of self-efficacy that is intrinsic to these strategies and can impact their applica-
tion (Freire et al., 2020). As Hamill (2003) found in her study, in the face of challenges a
higher sense of efficacy translated into greater effort and coping. Self-efficacy can be
characterized as one’s belief about the capacity to execute a particular behavior (Lawrance
& McLeroy, 1986). In a transversal correlational explanatory study (Montero & León,
2007), Sánchez-Rosas and Esquivel (2016) examined the link between boredom, task
value, and self-efficacy among 454 university students. The results indicated that task
value and self-efficacy strongly affected participants’ boredom, with self-efficacy having
a significant impact on task value. Y. Liu and Lu (2017) explored the association between
self-efficacy and boredom of 514 high school students. Utilizing a linear mixture model,
they demonstrated that self-efficacy negatively predicted boredom. Furthermore, self-
efficacy has also been found to be positively linked to L2 learners’ positive emotions,
such as FLE (An et al., 2021; Demir & Okyar, 2021). In their study, Z. Li and González
(2021) reported that self-efficacy exerted a direct effect on learners’ FLE.
As Benight and Bandura (2004) suggest, self-efficacy can be investigated within spe-
cific domains to ensure its better assessment and to further illuminate its predictive
capacity. One such particular domain is CSE (Pisanti et al., 2008). CSE relates to the
confidence that individuals have in their capabilities to effectively cope with external
stressors (Chesney et al., 2006). Bandura (1977) demonstrated that individuals with a
high sense of CSE have greater confidence in their capabilities and are more likely to
cope with and manage adversity through the use of appropriate strategies. CSE has been
associated with psychological well-being and subjective performance (e.g. Mazaheri &
Bahramian, 2016; Reeves et al., 2011). Using the CSE scale (Chesney et al., 2006),
Nicholls et al. (2010) found that CSE was positively related to subjective performance
and negatively to anxiety in the case of athletes. The results also indicated that self-effi-
cacy promoted athletic performance via improving CSE beliefs. Laschinger et al. (2015)
administered surveys to new graduate nurses and revealed with the help of structural
equation modeling that CSE was a significant predictor of burnout and emotional well-
being. CSE has also been found to exert a strong influence on academic success (Barrows
et al., 2013). Using regression analysis, Watson and Watson (2016) showed that students
who were confident in their capacity to cope with challenges experienced less academic
stress, thus demonstrating a negative link between these two constructs. Moreover, Zhou
and Kam (2017) revealed the prominent role of learners’ self-efficacy and boredom cop-
ing strategies when experiencing boredom in classroom. Fallah (2017) probed the rela-
tionship between mindfulness, CSE, and anxiety among Iranian EFL students, providing
evidence for significant positive correlations between mindfulness and CSE. Moreover,
it was found that mindfulness and CSE were significantly and negatively correlated with
anxiety. With the exception of Fallah’s (2017) study, CSE still remains blatantly under-
appreciated and insufficiently understood, particularly in L2 learning and teaching. Thus,
it seems warranted to investigate the construct of CSE and its potential contributions in
EFL contexts, especially in connection with the occurrence of boredom.
5 FLE
In the 1980s, Krashen (1985) proposed the affective filter hypothesis which underlined
the crucial role of emotions in L2 learning. His hypothesis led many SLA scholars to
explore emotions, dedicating most of their attention to negative affect, in particular anxi-
ety (Dewaele et al., 2018; MacIntyre, 2017). Nonetheless, with the advent of PP (Peterson,
2006), research on emotion has ventured into new territories in the context of SLA.
Drawing on PP and the concept of flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990), Dewaele and MacIntyre
(2014) proposed the construct of FLE, which is conceptualized as ‘a complex emotion,
capturing interacting dimensions of challenge and perceived ability that reflect the
human drive for success in the face of difficult tasks’ (Dewaele & MacIntyre, 2016, p.
216). FLE is an activating-positive achievement emotion which is rooted in the Broaden-
and-Build Theory of positive emotions (Fredrickson, 2001) and the Control-Value
Fathi et al. 9
Theory of achievement emotions (Pekrun, 2000, 2006). Dewaele and MacIntyre (2014)
view FLE as a positive emotional state experienced by L2 learners when their psycho-
logical needs are met during learning an L2.
FLE has been positively associated with academic achievement and FL proficiency
(e.g. Botes et al., 2022; Derakhshan & Fathi, 2023; Dewaele & Proietti Ergün, 2020;
Dewaele et al., 2018; Fathi et al., 2023; C. Li, 2020, 2022; Mohammad Hosseini et al.,
2022) by promoting psychological resiliency and broadening the mindsets of individuals
(C. Li et al., 2018; Resnik & Schallmoser, 2019). Botes et al. (2020) conducted a study
with an international sample of FL learners to examine correlations between FL profi-
ciency and positive and negative emotions. The results indicated that participants’ self-
perceived proficiency was associated with higher levels of FLE and lower levels of
foreign language anxiety (FLA). In another study, H. Zhang et al. (2020) demonstrated
that FLE of Chinese EFL students positively correlated with academic achievement. In
the realm of SLA, it is essential to examine in a single study how positive and negative
emotions interact to exert effects on EFL (Dewaele & MacIntyre, 2014), as these emo-
tions coexist in EFL learning. Although L2 boredom has been recently associated with
FLE in several studies (e.g. Dewaele & Li, 2021; Dewaele et al., 2023; Kruk et al., 2022;
C. Li & Wei, 2023), researchers have thus far failed to give proper attention to the ways
in which these two constructs can be linked. Adopting the Control-Value Theory of
achievement emotions, C. Li and Wei (2023) probed independent and joint predictive
roles of FLE, FLA, and FLLB in L2 achievement among 954 EFL learner in China.
Structural equation modelling (SEM) analysis revealed that all the three emotions were
predictors of achievement, with the effect of FLE being the strongest and the most endur-
ing. Pursuing the same line of inquiry, Dewaele et al. (2023) investigated the relationship
between three emotions, namely, FLE, FLA, and FLLB. The results demonstrated that
FLE was negatively related to FLLB and FLA, while FLA and FLLB were positively
linked to each other. In addition, it was found that FLA and FLLB had a negative effect
on achievement, whereas FLE was a positive predictor in this respect. In a study focusing
on the dynamic growth of FLE and FLLB in an EFL context, Kruk et al. (2022) reported
that an increase in FLE was strongly associated with a decrease in FLLB, highlighting
the negative link between FLE and FLLB.
6 The hypothesized model

As shown above, research dealing with the relationship between FLE and FLLB as well
as the investigation of their effects on FL achievement remains in need of further empiri-
cal inquiry. Furthermore, despite the fact that the constructs of boredom, mindfulness,
CSE and FLE have been, to a greater to a lesser degree, the focus of various studies
conducted in the realm of education or EFL, to the present authors’ knowledge no study
has so far sought to investigate the relationships between and/or among the constructs in
question. With this gap in mind, the study reported below examined relationships among
mindfulness, CSE, FLE, and boredom, also taking into account mediating effects of
boredom. Based on the theoretical and empirical considerations discussed above, a
structural model, specifying the interconnections between the constructs (i.e. boredom,
coping self-efficacy, mindfulness, and FLE) was hypothesized and is presented in
Figure 1.
CSE
FLE Boredom
Mindfulness
Figure 1. The hypothesized model of second language (L2) boredom based on coping self-
efficacy (CSE), mindfulness, and foreign language enjoyment (FLE).
Following Z. Li and González (2021), we hypothesized that CSE directly influences

learners’ FLE. Hence, a path from CSE to FLE was drawn. Moving on to the next hypoth-
esis, a path from mindfulness to FLE was projected. This path was based on previous
empirical research (e.g. Bóo et al., 2020; Langer et al., 1978; Thompson, 2009) in which
mindfulness positively predicted learning enjoyment. Consistent with the Control-Value
Theory of achievement emotions (Pekrun, 2006), the Broaden-and-Build Theory
(Fredrickson, 2003), and prior empirical evidence (e.g. Dewaele & Li, 2021; Kruk et al.,
2022; C. Li, 2022; C. Li & Wei, 2023), we hypothesized a path from FLE to boredom.
Although previous empirical studies have revealed a bidirectional relationship between
FLE and boredom (e.g. Dewaele et al., 2023), we opted for a unidirectional path from
FLE to boredom following the Broaden-and-Build Theory. According to this theory
(Fredrickson, 2003), positive emotions can build cognitive and emotional resources,
which in turn can act as antidotes for the detrimental effects of negative emotions.
Nevertheless, the reverse causality (i.e. boredom → FLE) might be less plausible, as
negative emotions experienced by an individual might necessitate the absence of his/her
positive affect during a task. In other words, by widening the scope of attention and cog-
nition, positive emotions (i.e. FLE) can reduce the intensity of negative ones (i.e. bore-
dom). In this connection, some previous studies have also identified a unidirectional
relationship between negative and positive emotions (Chow et al., 2007; Sutter-
Brandenberger et al., 2018). However, since the research literature on the association
between FLE and boredom is still in its infancy, positing both unidirectionality and cir-
cular causality in the relationship between the two constructs seems to be warranted and
merits further empirical explorations.
Concerning the link between CSE and boredom, Zhou and Kam (2017) indicated that
self-efficacy and coping strategies negatively affect boredom. Recent empirical studies
have also reported a negative correlation between self-efficacy and boredom (e.g. Y. Liu
Fathi et al. 11
& Lu, 2017; Sánchez-Rosas & Esquivel, 2016). Accordingly, we added a path from CSE
to boredom. Based on the attentional theory of boredom proneness (Fahlman et al., 2013;
Harris, 2000) and previous studies (e.g. Galla et al., 2020; Lee, 2017; Trunnell et al.,
1996; Waterschoot et al., 2021), mindfulness is hypothesized to be negatively correlated
with boredom. Correspondingly, a path from mindfulness to boredom was also drawn.
Finally, following the Broaden-and-Build Theory (Fredrickson, 2001, 2003), we hypoth-
esized that FLE acts as a mediator affecting the paths from CSE and mindfulness to
boredom. FLE as a positive emotion provides EFL learners with the capability to broaden
their thought–action repertoires and enhance their individual resources. From this per-
spective, more self-efficacious and mindful learners, who are more likely to feel enjoy-
ment in their L2 learning, are endowed with positive affect, enhanced personal resources,
and heightened resilience, all of which help reduce the experience of boredom. Against
this backdrop, the following hypotheses guided the aims of this study:
•• Hypothesis 1: CSE positively predicts FLE.

•• Hypothesis 2: Mindfulness positively predicts FLE.
•• Hypothesis 3: FLE negatively affects boredom.
•• Hypothesis 4: FLE mediates the relationship between CSE and boredom.
•• Hypothesis 5: FLE mediates the relationship between mindfulness and boredom.
III Method
1 Participants
Four hundred and fifty-six EFL learners from Iran partook in this study. The sample
comprised all first-year college students at the University of Kurdistan in Iran. They
were studying various disciplines in the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences,
such as psychology, counseling, accounting, economy, tourism, management, and
sociology. These students were required to pass a mandatory three-credit General
English course at the university. Since one of the researchers in this study was a faculty
member of this university and had more access to these students, the convenience sam-
pling procedure was used to select these participants. The sample comprised male
(N = 192) as well as female (N = 239) university students whose age varied from 18 to
25 years (M = 19.68, SD = 2.71). All the participants had studied English in school
before being admitted to the university. Their proficiency level was A1 or A2, as esti-
mated by the university’s placement test.
2 Measures
The original English versions of the scales were translated into Kurdish in this study.
They were then piloted with 10 EFL learners, and a skilled translator back-translated
them to guarantee the accuracy of translation. The translated questionnaires were also
checked by an independent expert. These translated versions were revalidated in the
present study, as explained in Section IV.
a CSE. The coping self-efficacy scale designed by Chesney et al. (2006) was used to
measure CSE. This 26-item questionnaire taps into respondents’ abilities in dealing with
tough and anxiety-provoking contexts. It comprises the following subscales: using prob-
lem-focused coping (UPFC, 12 items), stopping unpleasant emotions and thoughts
(SUET, 9 items), and getting support from family and friends (GSFF, 5 items). Each item
is assessed on an 11-point scale (0 = cannot do at all, 10 = certain can do). A sample item:
‘Take your mind off unpleasant thoughts.’
b Mindfulness. The Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS), developed by

Brown and Ryan (2003), was employed to assess participants’ mindfulness. This self-
report scale measures respondents’ inclination to attend to what is currently occurring.
This scale includes 15 items that are assessed on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from
‘almost always’ (1) to ‘almost never’ (6). A sample item: ‘I find it difficult to stay focused
on what’s happening in the present.’ The psychometric properties of this scale have been
confirmed in previous studies (e.g. Brown & Ryan, 2003; Fallah, 2017).
c FLE. Students’ level of enjoyment in learning a foreign language was gauged through 10
items taken from Jiang and Dewaele (2019). These items measure FLE at both social and
private levels: social enjoyment (SE, 6 items) and private enjoyment (PE, 4 items) (Dewaele
& MacIntyre, 2016). Each item is evaluated on a five-point Likert scale (1 = not at all,
5 = very much so). A sample item: ‘It is cool to know English as a foreign language.’
d Boredom. The L2 boredom scale (BPELC-R) validated by Pawlak, Kruk, et al. (2020)
was employed to gather the data on L2 boredom. This questionnaire includes 23 state-
ments which are evaluated on a seven-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7
(strongly agree). The two underlying components of the BPELC include: (1) Disengage-
ment, monotony and repetitiveness (DMR, 14 items), and (2) Lack of satisfaction and
challenge (LSC, 9 Items). A sample item: ‘During language classes, I often think about
unrelated things.’
3 Data collection
Data collection began by distributing an electronic survey through Google Forms, which
included the scales described above in Spring 2022. Then the link to the online question-
naire was shared with the General English course instructors who offered their coopera-
tion. They were also notified of the purpose of the study. Then, the instructors shared the
link with their students and asked them for voluntary participation. Participants were
informed that no additional advantage or grade would be given to them, and the obtained
data would remain confidential. For the purpose of obtaining more credible data, the
respondents were given about 10 days to complete the survey.
4 Analytic procedure
The data analysis was conducted with SPSS 24 and AMOS 26. After examining the data
as a preliminary screening, a two-stage structural equation modelling (Kline, 2019) was
Fathi et al. 13
employed. To this end, measurement and structural models were tested, respectively.
SEM was employed to test the suggested model to explore the potential associations
among the latent constructs. The model fit was evaluated using goodness-of-fit indices:
Chi-square divided by degree of freedom (χ2/df), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Goodness
of Fit Index (GFI), Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
(RMSEA), and Standardized Root-Mean-Square Residual (SRMR). A model is consid-
ered to have good fit when χ2/df < 3, CFI, GFI, and TLI ⩾ .90, and RMSEA ⩽ .08 as well
as SRMR < 0.10 (Kline, 2019; Vandenberg & Lance, 2000). Finally, to examine the
potential mediating role of FLE among the constructs, Baron and Kenny’s (1986) method
was employed.
IV Results
1 Preliminary analyses
Prior to testing the hypothesized model of boredom, the data were screened using SPSS
23. Missing values, outliers, and normality were examined. As the sample size was not
very large, Expectation–Maximization algorithm was employed to address the missing
data (Kline, 2019). Univariate as well as multivariate outliers were investigated using Z
scores and Mahalanobis D2, respectively. Additionally, normality assumptions were
checked employing skewness and kurtosis indices and values exceeding of ±2.0 showed
non-normal distribution (Kunnan, 1998). Outliers and non-normal values were detected
and discarded before further analysis. A summary of outliers, missing data and valid
cases is presented in Table 1.
2 Testing the measurement model

To evaluate the construct validity of the measurement models, confirmatory factor analy-
sis (CFA) was performed. The factor loadings for all items in the CFA model can be
found in Table 2. Adjustments were made as some measurement models did not meet the
recommended level of data adequacy. Upon examining the results, it was evident that
four CSE) items (C6, C8, C14, and C24), two mindfulness items (M13 and M15), and
three boredom items (B10, B12, and B16) showed factor loadings below the threshold of
0.5. Consequently, in accordance with the recommendation by Hair et al. (2006), these
items were excluded from the model. The final model (see Figure 2) was derived after
implementing these modifications to the original design, and the outcomes of the final
Table 1. Summary of outliers, missing data.
Original cases Outliers Missing cases Valid cases

Coping self-efficacy (CSE) 456 3 3 450
Mindfulness 456 3 5 448
Foreign language enjoyment (FLE) 456 3 4 449
Boredom 456 5 4 447
Table 2. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model estimates.
Unstandardized Estimate Standardized

Estimate
Estimate Standard Critical p
Error Ratio
C1 UPFC 1 0.872
C2 UPFC 0.756 0.098 7.704 < 0.001 0.745
C3 UPFC 0.627 0.085 7.376 < 0.001 0.690
C4 UPFC 0.708 0.093 7.599 < 0.001 0.738
C5 UPFC 0.823 0.106 7.777 < 0.001 0.743
C6 UPFC 0.362 0.071 6.102 < 0.001 0.489
C7 UPFC 0.585 0.080 7.305 < 0.001 0.673
C8 UPFC 0.456 0.070 6.115 < 0.001 0.493
C9 UPFC 0.932 0.119 7.849 < 0.001 0.755
C10 UPFC 0.804 0.102 7.858 < 0.001 0.740
C11 UPFC 0.608 0.084 7.222 < 0.001 0.671
C12 UPFC 0.731 0.098 7.450 < 0.001 0.702
C13 SUET 1 0.647
C14 SUET 0.494 0.069 6.090 < 0.001 0.483
C15 SUET 0.881 0.111 7.957 < 0.001 0.773
C16 SUET 0.629 0.086 7.280 < 0.001 0.674
C17 SUET 0.743 0.099 7.485 < 0.001 0.705
C18 SUET 0.605 0.069 7.846 < 0.001 0.624
C19 SUET 0.674 0.101 6.694 < 0.001 0.776
C20 SUET 0.498 0.088 5.652 < 0.001 0.599
C21 SUET 0.428 0.083 5.144 < 0.001 0.502
C22 GSFF 1 0.749
C23 GSFF 0.621 0.093 6.699 < 0.001 0.744
C24 GSFF 0.286 0.065 4.415 < 0.001 0.387
C25 GSFF 0.607 0.098 6.186 < 0.001 0.707
C26 GSFF 0.881 0.111 7.957 < 0.001 0.773
F1 SE 1 0.697
F2 SE 0.508 0.032 15.875 < 0.001 0.508
F3 SE 0.745 0.038 19.702 < 0.001 0.745
F4 SE 0.631 0.041 15.391 < 0.001 0.631
F5 SE 0.601 0.038 16.250 < 0.001 0.601
F6 SE 0.697 0.035 19.914 < 0.001 0.697
F7 PE 1 0.780
F8 PE 0.639 0.041 15.697 < 0.001 0.702
F9 PE 0.527 0.036 14.639 < 0.001 0.661
F10 PE 0.712 0.042 16.978 < 0.001 0.707
M1 Mindfulness 1 0.794
M2 Mindfulness 1.028 0.048 21.020 < 0.001 0.839
M3 Mindfulness 1.036 0.047 23.348 < 0.001 0.848
(Continued)
Fathi et al. 15
Table 2. (Continued)
Unstandardized Estimate Standardized
Estimate
Estimate Standard Critical p
Error Ratio
M4 Mindfulness 1.006 0.047 24.512 < 0.001 0.854
M5 Mindfulness 0.952 0.051 16.724 < 0.001 0.643
M6 Mindfulness 0.986 0.049 17.280 < 0.001 0.763
M7 Mindfulness 1.130 0.048 18.672 < 0.001 0.794
M8 Mindfulness 1.024 0.046 21.024 < 0.001 0.802
M9 Mindfulness 1.062 0.051 22.016 < 0.001 0.812
M10 Mindfulness 1.053 0.041 21.024 < 0.001 0.821
M11 Mindfulness 1.049 0.039 18.672 < 0.001 0.723
M12 Mindfulness 0.954 0.58 17.546 < 0.001 0.664
M13 Mindfulness 8.728 0.052 14.684 < 0.001 0.486
M14 Mindfulness 1.016 0.048 18.786 < 0.001 0.783
M15 Mindfulness 7.654 0.050 14.012 < 0.001 0.464
B1 DMR 1 0.855
B2 DMR 0.872 0.043 19.758 < 0.001 0.804
B3 DMR 0.891 0.045 19.786 < 0.001 0.788
B4 DMR 0.921 0.046 19.968 < 0.001 0.797
B5 DMR 0.934 0.047 14.576 < 0.001 0.812
B6 DMR 0.875 0.049 15.770 < 0.001 0.728
B7 DMR 0.821 0.052 15.767 < 0.001 0.605
B8 DMR 1.012 0.049 15.049 < 0.001 0.814
B9 DMR 0.952 0.048 14.677 < 0.001 0.746
B10 DMR 0.543 0.052 10.446 < 0.001 0.408
B11 DMR 0.821 0.048 14.038 < 0.001 0.679
B12 DMR 0.596 0.050 10.602 < 0.001 0.423
B13 DMR 0.812 0.049 12.049 < 0.001 0.728
B14 DMR 0.952 0.048 13.677 < 0.001 0.708
B15 LSC 1 0.608
B16 LSC 0.641 0.056 11.510 < 0.001 0.458
B17 LSC 0.926 0.046 13.779 < 0.001 0.677
B18 LSC 0.882 0.051 12.472 < 0.001 0.685
B19 LSC 0.982 0.043 19.163 < 0.001 0.823
B20 LSC 0.936 0.045 16.297 < 0.001 0.809
B21 LSC 0.961 0.042 17.415 < 0.001 0.817
B22 LSC 1.016 0.051 17.364 < 0.001 0.786
B23 LSC 1.032 0.053 18.321 < 0.001 0.792
Notes. C = Coping self-efficacy. UPFC = Using problem-focused coping. SUET = Stop unpleasant emotions and
thoughts. GSFF = Get support from family and friends. DMR = Disengagement, monotony and repetitiveness.
LSC = Lack of satisfaction and challenge. F = Foreign language enjoyment. SE = Social enjoyment. PE = Private
enjoyment. M = Mindfulness. B = Boredom.
Figure 2. The final model.

Notes. DMR = disengagement, monotony and repetitiveness. GSFF = getting support from family and
friends. LSC = lack of satisfaction and challenge. PE = private enjoyment. SE = social enjoyment. SUET =
stopping unpleasant emotions and thoughts. UPFC = using problem-focused coping.
Table 3. Convergent and discriminant validity.
Convergent validity Discriminant validity
Construct AVE CR CSE Mindfulness FLE Boredom

CSE 0.812 0.903 0.901
Mindfulness 0.661 0.812 0.356** 0.808
FLE 0.772 0.879 0.247* 0.234* 0.880
Boredom 0.728 0.852 –0.46** –0.396** –0.528** 0.853
Notes. CSE = coping self-efficacy. FLE = foreign language enjoyment. AVE = average variance extracted.
CR = composite reliability. Bold-faced values are square roots of the AVE. Off diagonals are correlation
coefficients.
*p < 0.05. **p < 0.01.
CFA model indicated an acceptable fit, as evidenced by χ2/df = 2.32, GFI = 0.92,
CFI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.06 (90% CI: 0.05–0.07), TLI = 0.92, and SRMR = 0.07.
Subsequently, the convergent and discriminant validity among the constructs were
evaluated. Table 3 shows the Average Variance Extracted (AVE), Composite Reliability
(CR), and correlation coefficients between the constructs. The results show that all con-
structs had acceptable levels of convergent validity, with AVEs ranging from 0.661 to
Fathi et al. 17
Table 4. Descriptive statistics and correlations.
M (SD) Cronbach’s α 1 2 3 4
1. Coping self-efficacy (CSE) 3.51 (1.15) .89 1.00
2. Mindfulness 3.29 (.89) .81 .35** 1.00
3. F oreign language 4.08 (.98) .78 .24* .23* 1.00
enjoyment (FLE)
4. Boredom 3.95 (1.21) .83 –.46** –.39** –.52* 1.00
Notes. *p < .05. **p < .01.
0.812 and CRs ranging from 0.852 to 0.903. The diagonal values represent the square
roots of the AVEs. The correlation coefficients between the constructs in the convergent
validity analysis were positive and significant, ranging from 0.234 to 0.901, indicating
that the constructs are related to each other. In contrast, the discriminant validity analysis
shows that the correlation coefficients between the constructs were generally lower than
the square roots of the AVEs, indicating that the constructs are distinct from each other.
Overall, the results provide evidence of the convergent and discriminant validity of the
measures used in the study.
Then, descriptive statistics and correlations were calculated for all the constructs (see
Table 4). In Table 4, the correlations among the variables are reported. The results indi-
cate a positive correlation between CSE and mindfulness (r = 0.35, p < .01), suggesting a
significant association between these constructs. Similarly, a positive correlation is
observed between CSE and FLE (r = 0.24, p < .05). On the other hand, there is a negative
correlation between CSE and boredom (r = −0.46, p < .01), indicating an inverse rela-
tionship between these variables. Additionally, a positive correlation is found between
mindfulness and FLE (r = 0.23, p < .05), while a negative correlation is observed between
mindfulness and boredom (r = −0.39, p < .01). Furthermore, a negative correlation is
detected between FLE and boredom (r = −0.52, p < .05). As for the reliability coefficients
of the scales, the alpha values were all higher than 0.70, confirming the adequacy of their
internal consistency (Hair et al., 2010).
3 Testing the structural model

After confirming the measurement model, several structural models were examined to
test the research hypotheses. These included the hypothesized partial mediation model
(Model C), the full mediation model (Model B), and the alternative direct model
(Model A). The fit indices for these three models are presented in Table 5. The results
indicated that the fit indices of the partial mediation model were significantly superior
to those of Model B (Δdf = 4, Δχ2 = 35.16, p < 0.001) and Model A (Δdf = 6, Δχ2 = 98.86,
p < 0.001), suggesting that the partial mediation model provided the most concise rep-
resentation of the relationships between the latent constructs. As such, based on the
obtained SEM values, the partial mediation model (Model C) was considered as the
preferred model for capturing the associations among the variables, in accordance with
its higher fit indices.
Table 5. Results of fit indices of structural models.
Model χ2 df χ2/df Δχ2 GFI CFI RMSEA TLI SRMR

Direct Effect Model (A) 851.68** 429 1.98 – 0.860 0.940 0.052 0.930 0.137
Full Mediation Model (B) 787.98** 427 1.84 64.64 0.882 0.974 0.037 0.964 0.050
Partial Mediation Model (C) 752.82** 423 1.77 35.16 0.901 0.980 0.031 0.977 0.047
Notes. Δχ2 presents differences between model and the following model. **p < 0.001.
Table 6. Path estimates of structural model: Standardized path coefficients (t-value).
Direct effects Full mediation Partial mediation

model model model
CSE → Boredom –0.33 (4.86***) –0.25 (3.17**)
Mindfulness → Boredom –0.16 (2.37*) –0.07 (0.34)
CSE → FLE 0.39 (4.80***) 0.36 (4.79***)
Mindfulness → FLE 0.25 (3.86**) 0.23 (3.29**)
FLE → Boredom –0.58 (7.12***) –0.48 (6.23***)
Notes. CSE = coping self-efficacy. FLE = foreign language enjoyment. *p < 0.05. **p < 0.01. ***p < 0.001.
Figure 2 presents the path coefficients for the finalized partial mediation model. In
this model, all path coefficients were found to be statistically significant, except for the
path linking mindfulness to boredom. The results of the structural model revealed that
CSE had a significant positive effect on FLE (β = 0.36, p < 0.001), providing support for
Hypothesis 1. Similarly, mindfulness showed a significant positive effect on FLE
(β = 0.23, p < 0.001), thereby supporting Hypothesis 2. Additionally, FLE demonstrated
a significant negative impact on boredom (β = −0.48, p < 0.001), lending support to
Hypothesis 3.
Then, the method proposed by Baron and Kenny (1986) was employed to examine
whether FLE served as a mediating variable among the constructs. Utilizing the direct
model (Table 6), significant path coefficients were observed between CSE and boredom
(−0.33, p < 0.001) as well as between mindfulness and boredom (−0.16, p < 0.05), satis-
fying the initial condition of Baron and Kenny’s test. Subsequently, in the full mediation
model, a significant path coefficient was found between CSE and FLE (0.39, p < .001)
as well as between mindfulness and FLE (0.25, p < .01), confirming the second require-
ment of Baron and Kenny’s method. Finally, in the partial mediation model, a significant
link between CSE and boredom was identified (β = −0.25, p < 0.01). Combined with the
indirect effect of FLE, the impact of CSE on boredom (−0.16; 0.36 × −0.46) was smaller
than the direct effect (0.16 < 0.25) of CSE on boredom. Hence, FLE partially mediated
the association between CSE and boredom, providing partial support for Hypothesis 4.
Furthermore, no significant effect of mindfulness on boredom was observed. However,
FLE was determined to be a full mediator between mindfulness and boredom
(0.23 × 0.48 = 0.11 > 0.07). Consequently, the influence of mindfulness on FLE contrib-
uted to a reduction in boredom, fully supporting Hypothesis 5.
Fathi et al. 19
Lastly, since the data collection relied on self-report scales, it is important to consider
the potential influence of common method bias on the findings. To address this concern,
Harman's single factor test was conducted following the approach outlined by Podsakoff
and Organ (1986). In this test, all the indicators corresponding to the four latent con-
structs (CSE, mindfulness, boredom, and FLE) were included in the maximum likeli-
hood extraction method. The results indicated that the first factor accounted for 23.14%
of the variance, which fell below the 50% threshold. Hence, it can be argued that com-
mon method bias did not significantly impact the results of this study.
V Discussion
The current study focused on exploring the associations among the four constructs of
FLE, CSE, mindfulness, and boredom among EFL students. Furthermore, the mediating
role of FLE in influencing the interplay among mindfulness, CSE, and boredom was
investigated. First, the construct validity of the used scales was approved by testing the
measurement model. Then, SEM results indicated some key findings with regard to the
hypothesized model.
With respect to the formulated hypotheses, the analyses yielded several important
observations. First, CSE was found to be a direct positive predictor of FLE (supporting
hypothesis 1). Given the fact that CSE was conceptualized or closely associated with
self-efficacy in the present study, the outcomes of this study are in line with the results
reported by Z. Li and González (2021) who suggested that self-efficacy can play a cen-
tral role in affecting FLE. Our findings also mirror the results of the studies carried out
by Demir and Okyar (2021) as well as An et al. (2021), showing an association between
self-efficacy and FLE. When EFL learners face difficulties and challenges during the
learning process, they must overcome their limitations to face up to these difficulties and
enjoy learning English (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; C. Li et al., 2018). In order to do so,
they need to believe in their abilities or, in other words, they should manifest greater
CSE. The results reported above are also in accordance with previous research regarding
the positive association between self-efficacy and enjoyment (Aldridge et al., 2012; R.
D. Liu et al., 2018; Mun & Hwang, 2003; Pekrun, 2014; Sağkal & Sönmez, 2022; S.
Yang et al., 2016). Hong et al. (2017) also demonstrated that students’ enjoyment was
correlated with their self-efficacy. Furthermore, the findings also partially resonate with
the results of Smith et al. (2012) who found that students with higher levels of confidence
in their reading abilities experienced more enjoyment in reading, confirming a substan-
tial relationship between self-efficacy and enjoyment.
Second, it was revealed that mindfulness was a direct positive predictor of FLE (sup-
porting hypothesis 2). This finding should come as no surprise in light of the study con-
ducted by Huang (2022), which revealed that EFL teachers’ mindfulness exerts a strong
influence on students’ FLE. Given that mindfulness can positively affect EFL learners’
positive orientation, it is reasonable to assume that positively oriented L2 learners are
likely to experience more enjoyment during the learning process (Dewaele et al., 2018).
This finding also resonates with the results of Bóo et al.’s (2020) study who provided
evidence for a positive link between mindfulness and enjoyment of students. Following
the non-judgmental nature of mindfulness (Dreyfus, 2011), we argue that students who
adeptly draw on mindfulness strategies have the ability to either deal with negative
thoughts (i.e. fear of failure) or ignore them, which, in turn, give rises to enjoyment for
learning (Deci & Ryan, 2008). Understood as the ability to be in the present and to seize
the moment (Cardaciotto et al., 2008), mindfulness enables students to stay focused on
the learning process and avoid worrying about the past and future events, which leads to
FLE. As illustrated in the literature review, mindfulness has long been assumed to be
linked to enjoyment (Langer et al., 1978; Thompson, 2009).
Third, FLE was found to influence boredom negatively (supporting hypothesis 3). This
finding corroborates prior empirical evidence for the negative relationship between these
two constructs (e.g. Dewaele & Li, 2021; Dewaele et al., 2023; Kruk et al., 2022; C. Li &
Wei, 2023). Conceptualized in terms of dissatisfaction and disengagement, boredom as a
negative emotion can be significantly affected by students’ lack of interest (Kruk &
Zawodniak, 2020; Pawlak, Derakhshan, et al., 2021). Students with no interest in the activi-
ties they are instructed to perform do not enjoy the learning process and can easily get bored.
A possible explanation for this finding can draw upon Dewaele and MacIntyre’s (2014)
description of FLE as ‘enjoyment, fun, interest, and lack of boredom’ (p. 242). Thus, we
argue that the absence of FLE in the L2 classroom is likely to trigger boredom among learn-
ers (C. Li & Wei, 2023). On the whole, our results support those reported by C. Li (2022)
who found that FLE was strongly and negatively correlated with boredom of EFL learners.
Fourth, it was found that FLE played a mediating role in affecting the relationship
among CSE, mindfulness, and boredom. More specifically, CSE affected boredom via
the mediation of FLE (CSE → FLE → boredom; partially supporting hypothesis 4). EFL
learners who have the competence and confidence in overcoming difficulties are more
likely to enjoy learning tasks (Smith et al., 2012) and, consequently, experience less
boredom (Dewaele & Li, 2021). Since CSE is a subtype of self-efficacy, our findings add
support to the growing body of empirical evidence suggesting that self-efficacy plays a
significant role in creating positive emotional outcomes, including lower levels of bore-
dom (Y. Liu & Lu, 2017; Luo et al., 2016; Sánchez-Rosas & Esquivel, 2016). Self-
efficacious learners attribute further value and importance to learning tasks (Schunk,
1991), and students who perceive learning as interesting and attach value to it experience
more enjoyment and less boredom (Kruk & Zawodniak, 2020; C. Li, 2021; Pawlak,
Kruk, et al., 2020; Pawlak, Zawodniak & Kruk, 2020). Consequently, we argue that self-
efficacy can increase learners’ perceived value of learning tasks (Sánchez-Rosas &
Esquivel, 2016), which in turn may decrease their experience of boredom. Furthermore,
students with higher levels of confidence in their ability to perform well during the learn-
ing process are more likely to feel enjoyment in their learning, which reduces their bore-
dom experience (Pekrun, 2014). By contrast, learners’ conviction of their inability to
cope with difficult and adverse situations is a significant cause of their boredom (Kruk &
Zawodniak, 2020). As Robinson (1975) demonstrated, for example, students who resort
to appropriate coping strategies are likely to avoid incipient boredom and are better able
to alleviate its consequences. In other words, we argue that L2 learners who can adeptly
employ coping strategies and, even more importantly, have sufficient confidence that
strategies they use will be effective, stand a better chance of combating negative emo-
tions such as boredom. This indicates that students characterized by high CSE are likely
to experience further positive emotions (e.g. FLE) and become immune to aversive
Fathi et al. 21
emotions (e.g. boredom). These results are in line with Zhou and Kam’s (2017) findings
highlighting the influential role of self-efficacy and boredom coping strategies in the
face of boredom experiences.
Likewise, mindfulness influenced boredom mediated by FLE (fully supporting
hypothesis 5). Mindful learners are more likely to exhibit positive orientations towards
their learning activities, resulting in greater enjoyment (Huang, 2022), which in turn
leads to less likelihood of experiencing boredom (C. Li & Wei, 2023). The significant
mediating role of FLE in this model testifies to its importance in L2 learning. Drawing
on the Broaden-and-Build Theory (Fredrickson, 2001), we can argue that experiencing
enjoyment in L2 learning can enhance EFL learners’ awareness or mindfulness and insti-
gate their employment of innovative and useful thoughts and actions to cope with diffi-
culties in their learning process, all of which contribute to lessening the boredom in the
L2 learning process. This finding also partially corroborates the outcomes of the study
conducted by Waterschoot et al. (2021) who reported the significance of mindfulness in
relation to boredom and indicated that an increase in individuals’ mindfulness is likely to
be accompanied by a drop in the intensity of this negative emotion. Additionally, this
outcome accords with the attentional theory of boredom proneness, which demonstrates
that a deficit in attention can act as an antecedent of boredom (Harris, 2000). Since mind-
fulness can improve attention and mood (Lee, 2017) while boredom is negatively related
to these two constructs (Eastwood et al., 2012; Harris, 2000), it can reasonably be argued
that mindfulness can contribute to reducing the level of boredom by enhancing attention
and positive emotions (LePera, 2011; X. Yang et al., 2021). According to Eastwood et al.
(2007), if attention cannot be sustained, it will either be misallocated or disengaged with
inner or outer worlds (e.g. thoughts or feelings), and one will not be able to regulate his
or her attention and awareness to the activities, which in turn can trigger the experience
of boredom. Such theoretical assumptions have found support in Galla et al.’s (2020)
study demonstrating that students with higher levels of mindfulness experienced less
boredom while learning. Similar results were reported by Trunnell et al. (1996) where
students characterized by high levels of mindfulness felt less bored and were more moti-
vated and engaged. Furthermore, our findings add support to the growing body of empir-
ical evidence suggesting that mindfulness plays a pivotal role in creating positive
outcomes for individuals (Koval & Todman, 2015; Lee, 2017; LePera, 2011). Given that
non-judgmentally evaluation of thoughts and emotions is a significant characteristic of
mindfulness (Wright et al., 2009), one can regulate his or her negative emotions and
thoughts as ‘passing phenomenological events that may momentarily capture attention
but can then be let go of’ (Frewen et al., 2008, p. 759). Therefore, we argue that although
boredom is an inevitable aspect of FL learning (Kruk, 2021a, 2021b), EFL learners char-
acterized by mindfulness can distance themselves from and easily deal with negative
emotions such as boredom. The findings might also be justified in terms of the effects of
FLA in L2 learning since this emotion has been frequently found to be positively corre-
lated with boredom in EFL contexts (e.g. Dewaele et al., 2023; Kruk, 2016, 2021a,
2021b, 2022; LePera, 2011; C. Li & Wei, 2023). Thus, there are grounds to assume that
mindfulness can lead to diminished anxiety (Strohmaier et al., 2021), particularly in the
context of EFL (Fallah, 2017; Mortimore, 2017). In fact, as Charoensukmongkol (2019)
found, L2 learners’ mindfulness was negatively correlated with their FLA.
VI Conclusions
In order to lend further support to the importance of learners’ psychological characteris-
tics in EFL contexts, this study sought to test a structural model of CSE, mindfulness,
boredom, and FLE. Moreover, a mediation model was examined in which it was hypoth-
esized that FLE would mediate the effects of learners’ CSE and learners’ mindfulness on
their boredom. As the results demonstrated, CSE, mindfulness, and FLE can reduce the
probability of experiencing boredom and help elucidate the instigation of this construct
in L2 settings. To our best knowledge, no previous empirical investigation has addressed
the relationships among these constructs.
When it comes to implications, the results of the current study are significant to EFL
administrators and development researchers interested in promoting the psychological
well-being of learners, and offer valuable insights into implementing emotional interven-
tions in L2 learning contexts. Additionally, the present investigation, as an innovative
one, can enrich the picture of the psychological pathways between mindfulness, CSE and
L2 boredom by showing that their relationship is mediated by pleasant emotion (e.g.
FLE). Given the significance of mindfulness in affecting FLE and boredom, educators
might consider implementing mindfulness intervention programs to enhance EFL learn-
ers’ mindfulness. By the same token, attempts should be made to foster CSE of EFL
learners by focusing on using practical strategies to bolster their perceptions of compe-
tence in overcoming hurdles in tough situations and managing stressful learning activi-
ties. Taking more viable steps to enhance levels of FLE, CSE and mindfulness, L2
practitioners might be able to diminish the likelihood of the occurrence of L2 boredom.
Also, prospective researchers might take into account these findings as a basis for future
investigations into the nature, features, multidimensionality, and antecedents of boredom
in EFL contexts.
The study is not exempt from limitations. First, the sample of this research was
selected from one university in Iran, thereby reducing the generalizability of the findings
to other EFL settings. Second, reliance on a quantitative design and self-report measures
is unlikely to tease out the real nature, intensity, and interconnectedness of such con-
structs as boredom, FLE, CSE and mindfulness. Thus, researchers are encouraged to
avail themselves of qualitative data collection tools in their future investigations.
Furthermore, emotions and affective variables are perhaps best examined using longitu-
dinal designs due to the fact that dynamicity has been attested to in L2 contexts (Saito
et al., 2018). Additionally, based on previous research regarding the bidirectional rela-
tionship between FLE and boredom (e.g. Dewaele et al., 2023), researchers can carry out
longitudinal and experimental studies to capture the dynamics of the bidirectionality or
circular causality between these two constructs.
Consent to participate
Informed consent was obtained from all the participants in this study.
Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, with-
out undue reservation.
Fathi et al. 23
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
ORCID iDs
Jalil Fathi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1146-1024
Mirosław Pawlak https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7448-355X
References
Aldridge, J., Afari, E., & Fraser, B. (2012). Influence of teacher support and personal relevance
on academic self-efficacy and enjoyment of mathematics lessons: A structural equation mod-
eling approach. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 58, 614–633.
An, Z., Wang, C., Li, S., Gan, Z., & Li, H. (2021). Technology-assisted self-regulated English
language learning: Associations with English language self-efficacy, English enjoyment, and
learning outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 558466.
Baer, R.A. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A conceptual and empirical
review. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 125–143.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological
Review, 84, 191–215.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social AnchorPsychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.51.6.1173
Barrows, J., Dunn, S., & Lloyd, C.A. (2013). Anxiety, self-efficacy, and college exam grades.
Universal Journal of Educational Research, 1, 204–208.
Bench, S.W., & Lench, H.C. (2019). Boredom as a seeking state: Boredom prompts the pursuit of
novel (even negative) experiences. Emotion, 19, 242.
Benight, C.C., & Bandura, A. (2004). Social cognitive theory of posttraumatic recovery: The role
of perceived self-efficacy. Behavior Research and Therapy, 42, 1129–1148.
Bóo, S.J., Childs-Fegredo, J., Cooney, S., Datta, B., Dufour, G., Jones, P.B., & Galante, J. (2020).
A follow-up study to a randomized control trial to investigate the perceived impact of mind-
fulness on academic performance in university students. Counselling and Psychotherapy
Research, 20, 286–301.
Botes, E., Dewaele, J.M., & Greiff, S. (2020). The power to improve: Effects of multilingualism
and perceived proficiency on enjoyment and anxiety in foreign language learning. European
Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8, 279–306.
Botes, E., Dewaele, J.M., & Greiff, S. (2021). The development and validation of the short form of
the foreign language enjoyment scale. The Modern Language Journal, 105, 858–876.
Botes, E., Dewaele, J.M., & Greiff, S. (2022). Taking stock: A meta-analysis of the effects of for-
eign language enjoyment. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 12, 205–232.
Brown, K.W., & Ryan, R.M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in
psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822.
Brown, K.W., & Ryan, R.M. (2004). Perils and promise in defining and measuring mindfulness:
Observations from experience. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11, 242–248.
Brown, K.W., Ryan, R.M., & Creswell, J.D. (2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations and
evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry, 18, 211–237.
Cardaciotto, L., Herbert, J.D., Forman, E.M., Moitra, E., & Farrow, V. (2008). The assessment of
present-moment awareness and acceptance: The Philadelphia mindfulness scale. Assessment,
15, 204–223.
Charoensukmongkol, P. (2019). The role of mindfulness in reducing English language anxiety
among Thai college students. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,
22, 414–427.
Chesney, M.A., Neilands, T.B., Chambers, D.B., Taylor, J.M., & Folkman, S. (2006). A validity
and reliability study of the coping self-efficacy scale. British Journal of Health Psychology,
11, 421–437.
Chow, S.M., Hamagani, F., & Nesselroade, J.R. (2007). Age differences in dynamical emotion–
cognition linkages. Psychology and Aging, 22, 765–780.
Coşkun, A., & Yüksel, Y. (2022). Examining English as a foreign language students’ boredom in
terms of different variables. Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature and Culture,
7, 19–36.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper Collins.
Davari, H., Karami, H., Nourzadeh, S., & Iranmehr, A. (2020). Examining the validity of the
achievement emotions questionnaire for measuring more emotions in the foreign language
classroom. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 43, 701–714.
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being
across life’s domains. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie Canadienne, 49, 14–23.
Demir, Y., & Okyar, H. (2021). A path-analytic study into foreign language enjoyment, will-
ingness to communicate in English, self-efficacy, and academic achievement. Excellence in
Education Journal, 10, 33–69.
Derakhshan, A., & Fathi, J. (2023). Grit and foreign language enjoyment as predictors of EFL
learners’ online engagement: The mediating role of online learning self-efficacy. The Asia-
Pacific Education Researcher. Epub ahead of print 26 May 2023. DOI: 10.1007/s40299-023-
00745-x
Derakhshan, A., Fathi, J., Pawlak, M., & Kruk, M. (2022). Classroom social climate, growth lan-
guage mindset, and student engagement: The mediating role of boredom in learning English
as a foreign language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. Epub ahead
of print 13 July 2022. DOI: 10.1080/01434632.2022.2099407
Derakhshan, A., Kruk, M., Mehdizadeh, M., & Pawlak, M. (2021). Boredom in online classes in
the Iranian EFL context: Sources and solutions. System, 101, 102556.
Dewaele, J.-M., Botes, E., & Greiff, S. (2023). Sources and effects of foreign language enjoyment,
anxiety, and boredom: A structural equation modeling approach. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 45, 461–479.
Dewaele, J.-M., & Li, C. (2020). Emotions in second language acquisition: A critical review and
research agenda. Foreign Language World, 196, 34–49.
Dewaele, J.-M., & Li, C. (2021). Teacher enthusiasm and students’ social-behavioral learning
engagement: The mediating role of student enjoyment and boredom in Chinese EFL classes.
Language Teaching Research, 25, 922–945.
Dewaele, J.-M., & MacIntyre, P.D. (2014). The two faces of Janus? Anxiety and enjoyment in the
foreign language classroom. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 4, 237–274.
Dewaele, J.-M., & MacIntyre, P.D. (2016). Foreign language enjoyment and foreign language
classroom anxiety: The right and left feet of FL learning? In P.D. MacIntyre, T. Gregersen,
& S. Mercer (Eds.), Positive psychology in SLA (pp. 215–236). Multilingual Matters.
Dewaele, J.-M., & Proietti Ergün, A.L. (2020). How different are the relations between enjoyment,
anxiety, attitudes/motivation and course marks in pupils’ Italian and English as foreign lan-
guages? Journal of the European Second Language Association, 4, 45–57.
Fathi et al. 25
Dewaele, J.-M., Witney, J., Saito, K., & Dewaele, L. (2018). Foreign language enjoyment and anx-
iety: The effect of teacher and learner variables. Language Teaching Research, 22, 676–697.
Dreyfus, G. (2011). Is mindfulness present-centred and non-judgmental? A discussion of the cog-
nitive dimensions of mindfulness. Contemporary Buddhism, 12, 41–54.
Dunn, B.R., Hartigan, J.A., & Mikulas, W.L. (1999). Concentration and mindfulness meditations:
Unique forms of consciousness? Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 24, 147–165.
Eastwood, J.D., Cavaliere, C., Fahlman, S.A., & Eastwood, A.E. (2007). A desire for desires:
Boredom and its relation to alexithymia. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1035–
1045.
Eastwood, J.D., Frischen, A., Fenske, M.J., & Smilek, D. (2012). The unengaged mind: Defining
boredom in terms of attention. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 482–495.
Eren, A., & Coskun, H. (2016). Students’ level of boredom, boredom coping strategies, epistemic
curiosity, and graded performance. The Journal of Educational Research, 109, 574–588.
Fahlman, S.A., Mercer-Lynn, K.B., Flora, D.B., & Eastwood, J.D. (2013). Development and vali-
dation of the multidimensional state boredom scale. Assessment, 20, 68–85.
Fallah, N. (2017). Mindfulness, coping self-efficacy and foreign language anxiety: A mediation
analysis. Educational Psychology, 37, 745–756.
Farmer, R., & Sundberg, N.D. (1986). Boredom proneness: The development and correlates of a
new scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 50, 4–17.
Fathi, J., Pawlak, M., Mehraein, S., Hosseini, H.M., & Derakhshesh, A. (2023). Foreign language
enjoyment, ideal L2 self, and intercultural communicative competence as predictors of will-
ingness to communicate among EFL learners. System, 115, 103067.
Fredrickson, B.L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-
build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218–226.
Fredrickson, B.L. (2003). The value of positive emotions: The emerging science of positive psy-
chology looks into why it's good to feel good. American Scientist, 91, 330–335.
Freire, C., Ferradás, M.D.M., Regueiro, B., Rodríguez, S., Valle, A., & Núñez, J.C. (2020). Coping
strategies and self-efficacy in university students: A person-centered approach. Frontiers in
Psychology, 11, 841.
Frewen, P.A., Evans, E.M., Maraj, N., Dozois, D.J., & Partridge, K. (2008). Letting go: Mindfulness
and negative automatic thinking. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 32, 758–774.
Galla, B.M., Esposito, M.V., & Fiore, H.M. (2020). Mindfulness predicts academic diligence in
the face of boredom. Learning and Individual Differences, 81, 101864.
Goetz, T., Frenzel, A.C., Pekrun, R., Hall, N.C., & Lüdtke, O. (2007). Between- and within-domain
relations of students’ academic emotions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 715–733.
Guo, Y., & Qiu, Y. (2021). Taking a fresh look at foreign language enjoyment research in SLA:
Current status, future directions, and pedagogical implications. Frontiers in Psychology, 12,
820025.
Hamill, S.K. (2003). Resilience and self-efficacy: The importance of efficacy beliefs and coping
mechanisms in resilient adolescents. Colgate University Journal of the Sciences, 35, 115–146.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multirative data analysis: A global
perspective. Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hair, J.F., Jr., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.L. (2006). Multivariate data
analysis. 6th edition. Prentice Education.
Harris, M.B. (2000). Correlates and characteristics of boredom proneness and boredom 1. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 576–598.
Henriksen, D., Richardson, C., & Shack, K. (2020). Mindfulness and creativity: Implications for
thinking and learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37, 100689.
Hill, A.B., & Perkins, R.E. (1985). Towards a model of boredom. British Journal of Psychology,
76, 235–240.
Hong, J.C., Hwang, M.Y., Tai, K.H., & Lin, P.H. (2017). Intrinsic motivation of Chinese learning
in predicting online learning self-efficacy and flow experience relevant to students’ learning
progress. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30, 552–574.
Huang, J. (2022). The role of English as a foreign language teachers’ mindfulness and compas-
sion in fostering students’ foreign language enjoyment. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 899298.
Jiang, Y., & Dewaele, J.M. (2019). How unique is the foreign language classroom enjoyment and
anxiety of Chinese EFL learners? System, 82, 13–25.
Jin, Y., & Zhang, L.J. (2021). The dimensions of foreign language classroom enjoyment and their
effect on foreign language achievement. International Journal of Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism, 24, 1–15.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: past, present, and future.
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 144–156.
Kline, R.B. (2019). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Publications.
Koval, S.R., & Todman, M. (2015). Induced boredom constrains mindfulness: An online demon-
stration. Psychology and Cognitive Sciences Open Journal, 1, 1–9.
Krashen, S.D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Addison-Wesley Longman.
Kristjánsson, K. (2012). Positive psychology and positive education: Old wine in new bottles?
Educational Psychologist, 47, 86–105.
Kruk, M. (2016). Variations in motivation, anxiety and boredom in learning English in second life.
The EuroCALL Review, 24, 25–39.
Kruk, M. (2021a). Investigating the experience of boredom during reading sessions in the foreign
language classroom. Journal of Language and Education, 7, 89–103.
Kruk, M. (2021b). Investigating dynamic relationships among individual difference variables in
learning English as a foreign language in a virtual world. Springer.
Kruk, M. (2022). Dynamicity of perceived willingness to communicate, motivation, boredom and
anxiety in second life: The case of two advanced learners of English. Computer Assisted
Language Learning, 35, 190–216.
Kruk, M., Pawlak, M., Elahi Shirvan, M., Taherian, T., & Yazdanmehr, E. (2022). A longitudinal
study of foreign language enjoyment and boredom: A latent growth curve modeling. Language
Teaching Research. Epub ahead of print 17 March 2022. DOI: 10.1177/13621688221082303
Kruk, M., Pawlak, M., & Zawodniak, J. (2021). Another look at boredom in language instruction:
The role of the predictable and the unexpected. Studies in Second Language Learning and
Teaching, 11, 15–40.
Kruk, M., & Zawodniak, J. (2018). Boredom in practical English language classes: Insights
from interview data. In L. Szymański, J. Zawodniak, A. Łobodziec, & M. Smoluk (Eds.),
Interdisciplinary views on the English language, literature and culture (pp. 177–191).
Uniwersytet Zielonogóski.
Kruk, M., & Zawodniak, J. (2020). A comparative study of the experience of boredom in the L2
and L3 classroom. English Teaching & Learning, 44, 417–437.
Kunnan, A.J. (1998). An introduction to structural equation modelling for language assessment
research. Language Testing, 15, 295–332
Langer, E.J., Blank, A., & Chanowitz, B. (1978). The mindlessness of ostensibly thoughtful
action: The role of ‘placebic’ information in interpersonal interaction. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 36, 635–642.
Larson, R.W., & Richards, M.H. (1991). Boredom in the middle school years: Blaming schools
versus blaming students. American Journal of Education, 99, 418–443.
Fathi et al. 27
Laschinger, H.K.S., Borgogni, L., Consiglio, C., & Read, E. (2015). The effects of authentic lead-
ership, six areas of work life, and occupational coping self-efficacy on new graduate nurses’
burnout and mental health: A cross-sectional study. International Journal of Nursing Studies,
52, 1080–1089.
Lawrance, L., & McLeroy, K.R. (1986). Self-efficacy and health education. Journal of School
Health, 56, 317–321.
Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.
Lee, K.S.F. (2017). Boredom proneness and symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress: The
moderating effect of mindfulness. Doctoral dissertation, Alliant International University,
Alhambra, CA.
LePera, N. (2011). Relationships between boredom proneness, mindfulness, anxiety, depression,
and substance use. The New School Psychology Bulletin, 8, 15–25.
Li, C. (2020). A positive psychology perspective on Chinese EFL students’ trait emotional intel-
ligence, foreign language enjoyment and EFL learning achievement. Journal of Multilingual
and Multicultural Development, 41, 246–263.
Li, C. (2021). A control–value theory approach to boredom in English classes among university
students in China. Modern Language Journal, 105, 317–334.
Li, C. (2022). Foreign language learning boredom and enjoyment: The effects of learner variables
and teacher variables. Language Teaching Research. Epub ahead of print 10 May 2022. DOI:
10.1177/13621688221090324
Li, C., & Dewaele, J.M. (2020). The predictive effects of trait emotional intelligence and online
learning achievement perceptions on foreign language class boredom among Chinese univer-
sity students. Foreign Languages and Foreign Language Teaching, 5, 33–44.
Li, C., Dewaele, J.M., & Hu, Y. (2023). Foreign language learning boredom: Conceptualization
and measurement. Applied Linguistics Review, 14, 223–249.
Li, C., Jiang, G., & Dewaele, J.M. (2018). Understanding Chinese high school students’ foreign
language enjoyment: Validation of the Chinese version of the foreign language enjoyment
scale. System, 76, 183–196.
Li, C., & Wei, L. (2023). Anxiety, enjoyment, and boredom in language learning amongst junior
secondary students in rural China: How do they contribute to L2 achievement? Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 45, 289–290.
Li, Z., & González, O.R.G. (2021). The relationship of self-efficacy for and enjoyment of learn-
ing Chinese as a foreign language with Chinese academic achievement of grades 7 and 8
students at Pramandanijianukroah school, Bangkok, Thailand. Scholar: Human Sciences,
13, 360.
Liu, Y., & Lu, Z. (2017). The relationship between academic self-efficacy and academic-related
boredom: MAOA gene as a moderator. Youth & Society, 49, 254–267.
Liu, R.D., Zhen, R., Ding, Y., Liu, Y., Wang, J., Jiang, R., & Xu, L. (2018). Teacher support
and math engagement: Roles of academic self-efficacy and positive emotions. Educational
Psychology, 38, 3–16.
Luo, W., Ng, P.T., Lee, K., & Aye, K.M. (2016). Self-efficacy, value, and achievement emotions
as mediators between parenting practice and homework behavior: A control-value theory
perspective. Learning and Individual Differences, 50, 275–282.
MacIntyre, P.D. (2017). An overview of language anxiety research and trends in its development.
In C. Gkonou, M. Daubney, & J.-M. Dewaele (Eds.), New insights into language anxiety:
Theory, research and educational implications (pp. 11–30). Multilingual Matters.
MacIntyre, P.D., & Gregersen, T. (2012). Emotions that facilitate language learning: The positive-
broadening power of the imagination. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching,
2, 193–213.
MacIntyre, P.D., & Vincze, L. (2017). Positive and negative emotions underlie motivation for L2
learning. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 7, 61–88.
Macklem, G.L. (2015). Boredom in the classroom: Addressing student motivation, self-regulation,
and engagement in learning. Springer.
Mazaheri, M., & Bahramian, S.H. (2016). Prediction of psychological well-being based on the
positive and negative affection and coping self–efficacy. Positive Psychology Research, 1,
1–14.
Mikulas, W.L., & Vodanovich, S.J. (1993). The essence of boredom. The Psychological Record,
43, 3.
Mohammad Hosseini, H., Fathi, J., Derakhshesh, A., & Mehraein, S. (2022). A model of class-
room social climate, foreign language enjoyment, and student engagement among EFL learn-
ers. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 4847.
Montero, I., & León, O.G. (2007). A guide for naming research studies in psychology. International
Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 7, 847–862.
Mortimore, L. (2017). Mindfulness and foreign language anxiety in the bilingual primary class-
room. Educación y Futuro, 37, 15–43.
Mun, Y.Y., & Hwang, Y. (2003). Predicting the use of web-based information systems: Self-
efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model.
International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 59, 431–449.
Nett, U.E., Goetz, T., & Daniels, L.M. (2010). What to do when feeling bored? Students’ strategies
for coping with boredom. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 626–638.
Nett, U.E., Goetz, T., & Hall, N.C. (2011). Coping with boredom in school: An experience sam-
pling perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 49–59.
Nicholls, A.R., Polman, R., & Levy, A.R. (2010). Coping self-efficacy, pre-competitive anxiety,
and subjective performance among athletes. European Journal of Sport Science, 10, 97–102.
Niculescu, A.C., Tempelaar, D.T., Dailey-Hebert, A., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W.H. (2016).
Extending the change–change model of achievement emotions: The inclusion of negative
learning emotions. Learning and Individual Differences, 47, 289–297.
Pawlak, M., Derakhshan, A., Mehdizadeh, M., & Kruk, M. (2021). Boredom in online English
language classes: Mediating variables and coping strategies. Language Teaching Research.
Epub ahead of print 29 December 2021. DOI: 10.1177/13621688211064944
Pawlak, M., Kruk, M., & Zawodniak, J. (2022). Investigating individual trajectories in experienc-
ing boredom in the language classroom: The case of 11 Polish students of English. Language
Teaching Research, 26, 598–616.
Pawlak, M., Kruk, M., Zawodniak, J., & Pasikowski, S. (2020). Investigating factors responsible
for boredom in English classes: The case of advanced learners. System, 91, 102259.
Pawlak, M., Zawodniak, J., & Kruk, M. (2020). The neglected emotion of boredom in teaching
English to advanced learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 30, 497–509.
Pekrun, R. (2000). A social cognitive, control-value theory of achievement emotions. In
J. Heckhausen (Ed.), Motivational psychology of human development: Developing motivation
and motivating development (pp. 143–163). Elsevier.
Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries,
and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18,
315–341.
Pekrun, R. (2014). Emotions and learning. Educational Practices Series, 24, 1–31.
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Daniels, L.M., Stupnisky, R.H., & Perry, R.P. (2010). Boredom in achieve-
ment settings: Exploring control–value antecedents and performance outcomes of a neglected
emotion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 531–549.
Fathi et al. 29
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Frenzel, A.C., Barchfeld, P., & Perry, R.P. (2011). Measuring emotions
in students’ learning and performance: The achievement emotions questionnaire (AEQ).
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 36–48.
Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., Marsh, H.W., Murayama, K., & Goetz, T. (2017). Achievement
emotions and academic performance: Longitudinal models of reciprocal effects. Child
Development, 88, 1653–1670.
Pekrun, R., & Perry, R. P. (2014). Control-value theory of achievement emotions. In International
handbook of emotions in education (pp. 130–151). Routledge.
Peterson, C. (2006). A primer in positive psychology. Oxford University Press.
Piechurska-Kuciel, E. (2017). L2 or L3? Foreign language enjoyment and proficiency. In G.D.
Gabryś-Barker, D. Gałajda, A. Wojtaszek, & P. Zakrajewski (Eds.), Multiculturalism, multi-
lingualism and the self (pp. 97–111). Springer.
Piniel, K., & Albert, A. (2018). Advanced learners’ foreign language-related emotions across the
four skills. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8, 127–147.
Pisanti, R., Lombardo, C., Lucidi, F., Lazzari, D., & Bertini, M. (2008). Development and valida-
tion of a brief occupational coping self-efficacy questionnaire for nurses. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 62, 238–247.
Plonsky, L., Sudina, E., & Teimouri, Y. (2022). Language learning and emotion. Language
Teaching, 55, 346–362.
Podsakoff, P.M., & Organ, D.W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and
prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 531–544.
Preckel, F., Götz, T., & Frenzel, A. (2010). Ability grouping of gifted students: Effects on aca-
demic self-concept and boredom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 451–472.
Reeves, C.W., Nicholls, A.R., & McKenna, J. (2011). The effects of a coping intervention on cop-
ing self-efficacy, coping effectiveness, and subjective performance among adolescent soccer
players. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 9, 126–142.
Resnik, P., & Dewaele, J.M. (2020). Trait emotional intelligence, positive and negative emotions
in first and foreign language classes: A mixed-methods approach. System, 94, 102324.
Resnik, P., & Schallmoser, C. (2019). Enjoyment as a key to success? Links between e-tandem
language learning and tertiary students’ foreign language enjoyment. Studies in Second
Language Learning and Teaching, 9, 541–564.
Ritsner, M., Ben-Avi, I., Ponizovsky, A., Timinsky, I., Bistrov, E., & Modai, I. (2003). Quality of
life and coping with schizophrenia symptoms. Quality of Life Research, 12, 1–9.
Robinson, W.P. (1975). Boredom at school. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 45,
141–152.
Sağkal, A.S., & Sönmez, M.T. (2022). The effects of perceived parental math support on middle
school students’ math engagement: The serial multiple mediation of math self-efficacy and
math enjoyment. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 37, 341–354.
Saito, K., Dewaele, J.-M., Abe, M., & In’nami, Y. (2018). Motivation, emotion, learning experi-
ence and second language comprehensibility development in classroom settings: A cross-
sectional and longitudinal study. Language Learning, 68, 709–743.
Sánchez-Rosas, J., & Esquivel, S. (2016). Instructional teaching quality, task value, self-efficacy,
and boredom: A model of attention in class. Revista de Psicología, 25, 1–20.
Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4),
207–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653133
Shao, K., Pekrun, R., Marsh, H.W., & Loderer, K. (2020). Control-value appraisals, achievement
emotions, and foreign language performance: A latent interaction analysis. Learning and
Instruction, 69, 101356.
Shao, K., Pekrun, R., & Nicholson, L.J. (2019). Emotions in classroom language learning: What
can we learn from achievement emotion research? System, 86, 102121.
Sharp, J.G., Sharp, J.C., & Young, E. (2020). Academic boredom, engagement and the achieve-
ment of undergraduate students at university: A review and synthesis of relevant literature.
Research Papers in Education, 35, 144–184.
Shearer, A., Hunt, M., Chowdhury, M., & Nicol, L. (2016). Effects of a brief mindfulness medita-
tion intervention on student stress and heart rate variability. International Journal of Stress
Management, 23, 232–254.
Smith, J.K., Smith, L.F., Gilmore, A., & Jameson, M. (2012). Students’ self-perception of reading
ability, enjoyment of reading and reading achievement. Learning and Individual Differences,
22, 202–206.
Strohmaier, S., Jones, F.W., & Cane, J.E. (2021). Effects of length of mindfulness practice on mind-
fulness, depression, anxiety, and stress: A randomized controlled experiment. Mindfulness,
12, 198–214.
Sutter-Brandenberger, C.C., Hagenauer, G., & Hascher, T. (2018). Students’ self-determined moti-
vation and negative emotions in mathematics in lower secondary education: Investigating
reciprocal relations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 55, 166–175.
Thompson, B. (2009). Mindfulness-based stress reduction for people with chronic conditions.
British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 72, 405–410.
Trunnell, E.P., White, F., Cederquist, J., & Braza, J. (1996). Optimizing an outdoor experience
for experiential learning by decreasing boredom through mindfulness training. Journal of
Experiential Education, 19, 43–49.
Tze, M.C. (2011). Investigating academic boredom in Canadian and Chinese students. Master’s
thesis. Available at: https://era.library.ualberta.ca/items/18930ec1-832b-4b20-b67d-28a7ff-
be2e6c (accessed June 2023).
Tze, V., Daniels, L.M., & Klassen, R.M. (2016). Evaluating the relationship between boredom and
academic outcomes: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 119–144.
Vandenberg, R.J., & Lance, C.E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invari-
ance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research.
Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4–70.
Wang, H., & Xu, Y. (2021). Effects of different types of boredom on foreign language learning.
Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 11, 51–56.
Waterschoot, J., Van der Kaap-Deeder, J., Morbée, S., Soenens, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2021).
‘How to unlock myself from boredom?’ The role of mindfulness and a dual awareness-
and action-oriented pathway during the COVID-19 lockdown. Personality and Individual
Differences, 175, 110729.
Watson, J.C., & Watson, A.A. (2016). Coping self-efficacy and academic stress among Hispanic
first-year college students: The moderating role of emotional intelligence. Journal of College
Counseling, 19, 218–230.
Weinerman, J., & Kenner, C. (2016). Boredom: That which shall not be named. Journal of
Developmental Education, 40, 18–23.
Westgate, E.C., & Wilson, T.D. (2018). Boring thoughts and bored minds: The MAC model of
boredom and cognitive engagement. Psychological Review, 125, 689–713.
Wright, S., Day, A., & Howells, K. (2009). Mindfulness and the treatment of anger problems.
Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14, 396–401.
Yang, S., Wang, B., & Lu, Y. (2016). Exploring the dual outcomes of mobile social network-
ing service enjoyment: The roles of social self-efficacy and habit. Computers in Human
Behavior, 64, 486–496.
Fathi et al. 31
Yang, X., Fan, C., Liu, Q., Lian, S., Cao, M., & Zhou, Z. (2021). The mediating role of boredom
proneness and the moderating role of meaning in life in the relationship between mindfulness
and depressive symptoms. Current Psychology, 40, 4635–4646.
Yu, Q. (2021). A review of foreign language learners’ emotions. Frontiers in Psychology, 12,
827104.
Zawodniak, J., Kruk, M., & Chumas, J. (2017). Towards conceptualizing boredom as an emotion
in the EFL academic context. Konin Language Studies, 5, 425–441.
Zhang, H., Dai, Y., & Wang, Y. (2020). Motivation and second foreign language proficiency: The
mediating role of foreign language enjoyment. Sustainability, 12, 1302.
Zhang, L.J., Saeedian, A., & Fathi, J. (2022). Testing a model of growth mindset, ideal L2 self, bore-
dom, and WTC in an EFL context. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development.
Epub ahead of print 19 July 2022. DOI: 10.1080/01434632.2022.2100893
Zhou, M., & Kam, C.C.S. (2017). Trait procrastination, self-efficacy and achievement goals: The
mediation role of boredom coping strategies. Educational Psychology, 37, 854–872.

Fathi Et Al 2023 Modelling Boredom in The Efl Context An Investigation of The Role of Coping Self Efficacy Mindfulness

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fathi Et Al 2023 Modelling Boredom in The Efl Context An Investigation of The Role of Coping Self Efficacy Mindfulness

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1182176

Language Teaching Research

Modelling boredom in the EFL

mindfulness, and foreign

b Control-Value Theory of achievement emotions. In addition to Broaden-and-Build The-

moment by moment’ (Kabat-Zinn, 2003, p. 145). Conceptualized as awareness of an

•• cognitive-approach, e.g. changing the perception of the situation by focusing on

6 The hypothesized model

Following Z. Li and González (2021), we hypothesized that CSE directly influences

•• Hypothesis 1: CSE positively predicts FLE.

b Mindfulness. The Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS), developed by

2 Testing the measurement model

Table 1. Summary of outliers, missing data.

Original cases Outliers Missing cases Valid cases

Table 2. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model estimates.

Unstandardized Estimate Standardized

Figure 2. The final model.

Table 3. Convergent and discriminant validity.

Convergent validity Discriminant validity

Construct AVE CR CSE Mindfulness FLE Boredom

Table 4. Descriptive statistics and correlations.

Notes. *p < .05. **p < .01.

3 Testing the structural model

Table 5. Results of fit indices of structural models.

Model χ2 df χ2/df Δχ2 GFI CFI RMSEA TLI SRMR

Table 6. Path estimates of structural model: Standardized path coefficients (t-value).

Direct effects Full mediation Partial mediation

Data Availability Statement

You might also like