Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37601332›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in sociology2023

Academic boredom(s): a person-centered investigation.

Dirk Tempelaar, Alexandra Niculescu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in sociology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Dirk TempelaarDepartment of Quantitative Economics, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Alexandra NiculescuCentre for Learning Science, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne · CHMaastricht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Should we refer to boredom or boredoms? Research on the emotion of boredom sets itself apart from studies on other emotions by posing the question: is boredom a singular concept or does it have multiple facets? In this manuscript presenting empirical research on academic boredom, our aim is to demonstrate the justification for claiming a distinct position. Person-centered models examining university students' achievement emotions reveal the existence of multiple types of boredom, in contrast to other learning emotions that are typically represented as singular constructs. Using data generated by dispositional learning analytics applications, we further investigate the progression of learning boredom over time, exploring the impact of the pandemic and analyzing how various student learning aptitudes, such as mindsets, epistemological beliefs, epistemic emotions, learning motivation, engagement, as well as demographic factors like gender and culture, can be considered as potential antecedents or triggers of boredom. Consistent with the control-value theory of achievement emotions, we conclude that control and value constructs serve as proximal antecedents of boredom, alongside epistemic boredom as a distal antecedent. However, the relationships between boredom and its antecedents exhibit notable variations across different types of boredom.

Indexed as

academic boredomactivity boredomboredom antecedentsdispositional learning analyticsepistemic boredomperson-centered modeling

Identifiers

PMID37601332
PMCPMC10436487
OpenAlexW4385580699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.