ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Reconceptualizing learning engagement: evidence for a context-sensitive structure in STEM education.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding student engagement as a psychological construct remains a persistent challenge in educational psychology, particularly in higher education STEM contexts. Traditional models distinguish engagement into behavioral, cognitive, and affective dimensions, yet often overlook how the structure of engagement may be shaped by contextualized learning activities. This study introduces and tests a novel, activity space-based model of engagement, hypothesizing that behavioral and cognitive engagement are organized by the specific academic environments in which they occur (e.g., lectures, exams, projects, recitations). Applying new engagement survey instruments that were iteratively developed to be contextually meaningful, we first present an exploratory factor analysis applied to 1,176 students from two different courses and institutions. Then we present a confirmatory factor analysis applied to 772 students in a third course. We find that a model organized by activity contexts-rather than by behavioral and cognitive distinctions-better fits the data and generalizes across STEM disciplines. The findings challenge conventional engagement theory and support a reconceptualization of engagement as a partially context-sensitive construct. This theoretical shift has implications for psychological models of learning and for the design of more precise, equitable interventions that address varied patterns of engagement within and across STEM domains.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.