- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Connecting the learning environment to student motivation and identity in physics: The mediating role of learning burnout

Li Tang1,*,†, Yue Xiao2,*, Yaxin Gao1, You Yu3, Mingjie Wan1, Qilong Cao1, and Wei Fang4,5,‡

  • *These authors contributed equally to this work.
  • †Contact author: tangli@yibinu.edu.cn
  • ‡Contact author: wfang@shnu.edu.cn
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 22, 010106 – Published 21 January, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/sqbh-vnp2

Abstract

In introductory physics courses, which are foundational for many science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, students’ motivational beliefs, such as self-efficacy, interest, and identity, are critical for their success and persistence. However, the high academic demands of physics courses can lead to learning burnout, a detrimental psychological syndrome comprising exhaustion, cynicism, and inadequacy that threatens student development. Despite the recognized importance of a supportive learning environment, there is a lack of research on the role of learning burnout in physics. More specifically, the pathways linking the learning environment, burnout, and motivational beliefs, as well as the generalizability of these pathways across genders, have not been systematically investigated. This study addresses these gaps by testing a model where learning burnout mediates the relationship between students’ perceived learning environment and their motivational beliefs and physics identity. The research employed a cross-sectional survey design with a sample of undergraduate students (N=1574) from three universities in China. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the hypothesized associations and multigroup SEM to examine gender invariance. The results revealed that a positive perceived learning environment, particularly a strong sense of belonging, was significantly associated with lower learning burnout. Furthermore, the study confirmed that learning burnout, specifically the dimensions of cynicism and inadequacy, partially mediated the relationship between the learning environment and students’ motivational beliefs. Students’ physics identity was most strongly and directly associated with perceived recognition, interest, and self-efficacy. Crucially, the structural model demonstrated invariance across genders, indicating that the identified psychological pathways are equivalent for male and female students. This study makes a significant contribution by integrating the concept of learning burnout into the physics education research framework and identifying its role as a key mediator. It provides a new perspective on gender equity, suggesting that disparities may arise from differing perceptions of the learning environment rather than from fundamentally different psychological processes.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Corrections

11 August, 2026

Correction: Typographical errors in the sixth and seventh sentences of the third paragraph of Sec. III B have been fixed.

Article Text

References (211)

  1. National Research Council, Discipline-Based Education Research: Understanding and Improving Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2012), 10.17226/13362.
  2. S. Olson and D. G. Riordan, Engage to Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC, 2012).
  3. E. F. Redish, Teaching Physics with the Physics Suite (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2003).
  4. J. L. Docktor and J. P. Mestre, Synthesis of discipline-based education research in physics, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 10, 020119 (2014).
  5. P. C. Hamerski, D. McPadden, M. D. Caballero, and P. W. Irving, Students’ perspectives on computational challenges in physics class, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 18, 020109 (2022).
  6. C. Angell, Ø. Guttersrud, E. K. Henriksen, and A. Isnes, Physics: Frightful, but fun. Pupils’ and teachers’ views of physics and physics teaching, Sci. Educ. 88, 683 (2004).
  7. I. M. Greca and A. R. P. de Ataíde, The influence of epistemic views about the relationship between physics and mathematics in understanding physics concepts and problem solving, in Springer Proceedings in Physics (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2016), pp. 55–64, 10.1007/978-3-319-44887-9_5.
  8. T. Bouchée, L. de Putter-Smits, M. Thurlings, and B. Pepin, Towards a better understanding of conceptual difficulties in introductory quantum physics courses, Stud. Sci. Educ. 58, 183 (2022).
  9. Z. Hazari, G. Sonnert, P. M. Sadler, and M.-C. Shanahan, Connecting high school physics experiences, outcome expectations, physics identity, and physics career choice: A gender study, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 47, 978 (2010).
  10. D. J. Lynch, Motivational beliefs and learning strategies as predictors of academic performance in college physics, Coll. Stud. J. 44, 920 (2010).
  11. D. Verdín, A. Godwin, G. Sonnert, and P. M. Sadler, Understanding how first-generation college students’ out-of-school experiences, physics and STEM identities relate to engineering possible selves and certainty of career path, in Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (IEEE, 2018), pp. 1–8, 10.1109/fie.2018.8658878.
  12. R. M. Lock, Z. Hazari, and G. Potvin, Physics career intentions: The effect of physics identity, math identity, and gender, AIP Conf. Proc. 1513, 262 (2013).
  13. L. Halim, N. A. Rahman, N. A. M. Ramli, and L. E. Mohtar, Influence of students’ STEM self-efficacy on STEM and physics career choice, AIP Conf. Proc. 1923, 030010 (2018).
  14. C. S. Gana, S. U. Christian, and A. A. Terpase, Students’ psychological predictors of academic achievement in physics, Jyvaskyla Stud. Educ. Psychol. Soc. Res. 9, 161 (2019).
  15. E. Bottomley, A. Kohnle, K. I. Mavor, P. J. Miles, and V. Wild, The relationship between gender and academic performance in undergraduate physics students: The role of physics identity, perceived recognition, and self-efficacy, Eur. J. Phys. 44, 025701 (2023).
  16. M. Bahnson, E. T. McChesney, C. Cooper, G. Dorvè-Lewis, A. Godwin, K. Binning, and L. DeAngelo, Gender and race/ethnicity differences in the predictors of course grade in a first-year engineering course and continued enrollment in engineering, J. Eng. Educ. 114, jee.70007 (2025).
  17. J. Vazquez-Abad, L. Winer, and J. R. Derome, Why some stay: A study of factors contributing to persistence in undergraduate physics, McGill J. Educ. 32, 287 (1997).
  18. J. P. Zwolak, R. Dou, E. A. Williams, and E. Brewe, Students’ network integration as a predictor of persistence in introductory physics courses, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 13, 010113 (2017).
  19. J. M. Cámara-Zapata and D. Morales, Cooperative learning, student characteristics, and persistence: An experimental study in an engineering physics course, Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 45, 565 (2020).
  20. V. Sawtelle, E. Brewe, and L. H. Kramer, Exploring the relationship between self-efficacy and retention in introductory physics, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 49, 1096 (2012).
  21. K. Saks, The effect of self-efficacy and self-set grade goals on academic outcomes, Front. Psychol. 15, 1324007 (2024).
  22. V. Sawtelle, E. Brewe, R. M. Goertzen, and L. H. Kramer, Identifying events that impact self-efficacy in physics learning, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 8, 020111 (2012).
  23. B. J. Zimmerman, Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn, Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25, 82 (2000).
  24. J. E. Maddux, Self-efficacy, in Interpersonal and Intrapersonal Expectancies, edited by P. D. Blanck (Routledge, Abingdon, 2016), pp. 41–46.
  25. D. H. Schunk and F. Pajares, The development of academic self-efficacy, in Development of Achievement Motivation, edited by A. Wigfield and J. S. Eccles (Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 2002), pp. 15–31.
  26. R. W. Lent, S. D. Brown, and K. C. Larkin, Relation of self-efficacy expectations to academic achievement and persistence, J. Counsel. Psychol. 31, 356 (1984).
  27. A. Bandura and E. A. Locke, Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited, J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 87 (2003).
  28. D. H. Schunk, Self-efficacy and academic motivation, Educ. Psychol. 26, 207 (1991).
  29. M. Uyun, Y. Bahriah, and F. Fitriani, Interest and learning motivation with student participation, Psikoislamedia J. Psikol. 7, 177 (2022).
  30. J. M. Harackiewicz, A. M. Durik, K. E. Barron, L. Linnenbrink-Garcia, and J. M. Tauer, The role of achievement goals in the development of interest: Reciprocal relations between achievement goals, interest, and performance, J. Educ. Psychol. 100, 105 (2008).
  31. K. A. Renninger and S. Su, Interest and its development, revisited, in The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation, edited by R. M. Ryan (Oxford University Press, New York, 2019), pp. 203–226, 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.12.
  32. R. Neito, E. Vilhunen, J. Lavonen, and K. Reivelt, Predicting situational interest by individual interest and instructional activities in physics lessons: An experience sampling approach, J. Balt. Sci. Educ. 22, 1063 (2023).
  33. X. Wu, H. Liu, L. Xiao, and M. Yao, Reciprocal relationship between learning interest and learning persistence: Roles of strategies for self-regulated learning behaviors and academic performance, J. Youth Adolesc. 53, 2080 (2024).
  34. M. Ainley, S. Hidi, and D. Berndorff, Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship, J. Educ. Psychol. 94, 545 (2002).
  35. S. Hidi and K. A. Renninger, The four-phase model of interest development, Educ. Psychol. 41, 111 (2006).
  36. S. French and D. Krause, Identity in Physics: A Historical, Philosophical, and Formal Analysis (Oxford University Press, New York, 2006).
  37. Z. Hazari, P. M. Sadler, and G. Sonnert, The science identity of college students: Exploring the intersection of gender, race, and ethnicity, J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 39, 82 (2010).
  38. S. Hyater-Adams, C. Fracchiolla, N. Finkelstein, and K. Hinko, Critical look at physics identity: An operationalized framework for examining race and physics identity, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 010132 (2018).
  39. E. W. Close, J. Conn, and H. G. Close, Becoming physics people: Development of integrated physics identity through the learning assistant experience, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 010109 (2016).
  40. R. Pekrun, T. Goetz, W. Titz, and R. P. Perry, Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research, in, Emotions in Education (Routledge, London, 2002), pp. 13–35.
  41. J. B. Vancouver, C. M. Thompson, E. C. Tischner, and D. J. Putka, Two studies examining the negative effect of self-efficacy on performance, J. Appl. Psychol. 87, 506 (2002).
  42. J. C. Turner, P. K. Thorpe, and D. K. Meyer, Students’ reports of motivation and negative affect: A theoretical and empirical analysis, J. Educ. Psychol. 90, 758 (1998).
  43. E. L. Deci and W. F. Cascio, Changes in intrinsic motivation as a function of negative feedback and threats, University of Rochester, 1972 (unpublished).
  44. J. B. Vancouver and L. N. Kendall, When self-efficacy negatively relates to motivation and performance in a learning context, J. Appl. Psychol. 91, 1146 (2006).
  45. P. Gable and E. Harmon-Jones, The blues broaden, but the nasty narrows: Attentional consequences of negative affects low and high in motivational intensity, Psychol. Sci. 21, 211 (2010).
  46. S. Reyes-de-Cózar, A. Merino-Cajaraville, and M. R. Salguero-Pazos, Avoiding academic burnout: Academic factors that enhance university student engagement, Behav. Sci. 13, 989 (2023).
  47. D. J. Madigan and T. Curran, Does burnout affect academic achievement? A meta-analysis of over 100,000 students, Educ. Psychol. Rev. 33, 387 (2021).
  48. H.-J. Yang, Factors affecting student burnout and academic achievement in multiple enrollment programs in Taiwan’s technical–vocational colleges, Int. J. Educ. Dev. 24, 283 (2004).
  49. L. Tang, F. Zhang, R. Yin, and Z. Fan, Effect of interventions on learning burnout: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Front. Psychol. 12, 645662 (2021).
  50. B. E. Stoliker and K. D. Lafreniere, The influence of perceived stress, loneliness, and learning burnout on university students’ educational experience, Coll. Stud. J. 49, 146 (2015).
  51. A.-M. Cazan, Learning motivation, engagement and burnout among university students, Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 187, 413 (2015).
  52. W. B. Schaufeli, I. M. Martínez, A. M. Pinto, M. Salanova, and A. B. Bakker, Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study, J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 33, 464 (2002).
  53. S. R. Jacobs and D. Dodd, Student burnout as a function of personality, social support, and workload, J. Coll. Stud. Dev. 44, 291 (2003).
  54. C. Maslach, S. E. Jackson, and M. P. Leiter, Maslach Burnout Inventory (Scarecrow Education, Lanham, MD, 1997).
  55. K. Salmela-Aro, N. Kiuru, E. Leskinen, and J.-E. Nurmi, School Burnout Inventory (SBI), Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 25, 48 (2009).
  56. Q. Hu and W. B. Schaufeli, The factorial validity of the Maslach Burnout Inventory—student survey in China, Psychol. Rep. 105, 394 (2009).
  57. S. H. Lin and Y. C. Huang, Life stress and academic burnout, Act. Learn. Higher Educ. 15, 77 (2014).
  58. M. Salanova, W. Schaufeli, I. Martínez, and E. Bresó, How obstacles and facilitators predict academic performance: The mediating role of study burnout and engagement, Anxiety Stress Coping 23, 53 (2010).
  59. L. N. Dyrbye, M. R. Thomas, and T. D. Shanafelt, Systematic review of depression, anxiety, and other indicators of psychological distress among U.S. and Canadian medical students, Acad. Med. 81, 354 (2006).
  60. B. Slivar, The syndrome of burnout, self-image, and anxiety with grammar school students, Horiz. Psychol. 10, 21 (2001).
  61. J. Ernst, K.-D. Jordan, S. Weilenmann, O. Sazpinar, S. Gehrke, F. Paolercio, H. Petry, M. C. Pfaltz, M. Méan, O. Aebischer, D. Gachoud, N. Morina, R. von Känel, and T. R. Spiller, Burnout, depression and anxiety among Swiss medical students—A network analysis, J. Psychiatr. Res. 143, 196 (2021).
  62. P. Peng, S. Chen, Y. Hao, L. He, Q. Wang, Y. Zhou, Y.-Y. Tang, W. F. Yang, Q. Wu, and T. Liu, Network of burnout, depression, anxiety, and dropout intention in medical undergraduates, Int. J. Soc. Psychiatry 69, 1520 (2023).
  63. J. Sinval, P. Oliveira, F. Novais, C. M. Almeida, and D. Telles-Correia, Correlates of burnout and dropout intentions in medical students: A cross-sectional study, J. Affect. Disord. 364, 221 (2024).
  64. E. Demerouti, A. B. Bakker, F. Nachreiner, and W. B. Schaufeli, The job demands-resources model of burnout, J. Appl. Psychol. 86, 499 (2001).
  65. A. B. Bakker and E. Demerouti, The job demands-resources model: State of the art, J. Manage. Psychol. 22, 309 (2007).
  66. M. D. Galanakis and E. Tsitouri, Positive psychology in the working environment. Job demands-resources theory, work engagement and burnout: A systematic literature review, Front. Psychol. 13, 1022102 (2022).
  67. M. Hanrahan, The effect of learning environment factors on students’ motivation and learning, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 20, 737 (1998).
  68. Y. H. Supratno, Murtono, and W. Mochamad, The influence of student motivation, school environment, on student learning achievement, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1823, 012089 (2021).
  69. A. Lizzio, K. Wilson, and R. Simons, University students’ perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes: Implications for theory and practice, Stud. Higher Educ. 27, 27 (2002).
  70. F. H. Müller and J. Louw, Learning environment, motivation and interest: Perspectives on self-determination theory, South Afr. J. Psychol. 34, 169 (2004).
  71. A. B. Bakker and E. Demerouti, Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward, J. Occup. Health Psychol. 22, 273 (2017).
  72. K. Salmela-Aro and K. Upadyaya, School burnout and engagement in the context of demands-resources model, Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 84, 137 (2014).
  73. Y. Li and C. Singh, Impact of perceived recognition by physics instructors on women’s self-efficacy and interest, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 19, 020125 (2023).
  74. K. M. Whitcomb, A. Maries, and C. Singh, Progression in self-efficacy, interest, identity, sense of belonging, perceived recognition and effectiveness of peer interaction of physics majors and comparison with non-majors and Ph.D. students, Res. Sci. Educ. 53, 525 (2023).
  75. M. Sundstrom and N. G. Holmes, Bias in physics peer recognition does not explain gaps in perceived peer recognition, Nat. Phys. 21, 524 (2025).
  76. T. L. Strayhorn, College Students’ Sense of Belonging: A Key to Educational Success for All Students, 2nd ed. (Routledge, New York, 2018).
  77. B. M. K. Hagerty, J. Lynch-Sauer, K. L. Patusky, M. Bouwsema, and P. Collier, Sense of belonging: A vital mental health concept, Arch. Psychiatr. Nurs. 6, 172 (1992).
  78. K. L. Lewis, J. G. Stout, S. J. Pollock, N. D. Finkelstein, and T. A. Ito, Fitting in or opting out: A review of key social-psychological factors influencing a sense of belonging for women in physics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020110 (2016).
  79. S. Cwik and C. Singh, Students’ sense of belonging in introductory physics course for bioscience majors predicts their grade, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 18, 010139 (2022).
  80. Y. Li and C. Singh, Sense of belonging is an important predictor of introductory physics students’ academic performance, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 19, 020137 (2023).
  81. K. H. Rubin, W. Bukowski, and J. G. Parker, Peer interactions, relationships, and groups, in Handbook of Child Psychology, 6th ed., edited by N. Eisenberg (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2006), Vol. 3, pp. 571–645.
  82. T. D. Nguyen, M. Cannata, and J. Miller, Understanding student behavioral engagement: Importance of student interaction with peers and teachers, J. Educ. Res. 111, 163 (2018).
  83. M. J. Brundage, A. Malespina, and C. Singh, Peer interaction facilitates co-construction of knowledge in quantum mechanics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 19, 020133 (2023).
  84. K. Upadyaya and K. Salmela-Aro, Development of school engagement in association with academic success and well-being in varying social contexts, Eur. Psychol. 18, 136 (2013).
  85. Z. Y. Kalender, E. Marshman, C. D. Schunn, T. J. Nokes-Malach, and C. Singh, Gendered patterns in the construction of physics identity from motivational factors, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 020119 (2019).
  86. L. M. Santana and C. Singh, Effects of male-dominated physics culture on undergraduate women, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 19, 020134 (2023).
  87. J. L. Rosenberg, N. Holincheck, K. Fernández, B. W. Dreyfus, F. Wardere, S. Stehle, and T. N. Butler, Role of mentorship, career conceptualization, and leadership in developing women’s physics identity and belonging, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 20, 010114 (2024).
  88. R. W. Lent, S. D. Brown, and G. Hackett, Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance, J. Vocat. Behav. 45, 79 (1994).
  89. R. W. Lent, S. D. Brown, and K. C. Larkin, Self-efficacy in the prediction of academic performance and perceived career options, J. Counsel. Psychol. 33, 265 (1986).
  90. J. M. Harackiewicz, K. E. Barron, J. M. Tauer, and A. J. Elliot, Predicting success in college: A longitudinal study of achievement goals and ability measures as predictors of interest and performance from freshman year through graduation, J. Educ. Psychol. 94, 562 (2002).
  91. R. W. Lent and S. D. Brown, Social cognitive career theory at 25: Empirical status of the interest, choice, and performance models, J. Vocat. Behav. 115, 103316 (2019).
  92. A. Bandura, Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change, Psychol. Rev. 84, 191 (1977).
  93. A. Bandura, Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective, Annu. Rev. Psychol. 52, 1 (2001).
  94. A. Bandura, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986).
  95. A. Bandura, Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency, Am. Psychol. 37, 122 (1982).
  96. A. Bandura, Human agency in social cognitive theory, Am. Psychol. 44, 1175 (1989).
  97. A. Bandura, Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control (W. H. Freeman, New York, 1997), 10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158.
  98. F. Pajares, Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings, Rev. Educ. Res. 66, 543 (1996).
  99. H. S. Fencl and K. R. Scheel, Pedagogical approaches, contextual variables, and the development of student self-efficacy in undergraduate physics courses, AIP Conf. Proc. 720, 173 (2004).
  100. S. Çalişkan, G. S. Selçuk, and M. Erol, Development of physics self-efficacy scale, AIP Conf. Proc. 899, 483 (2007).
  101. N. Suprapto, T.-S. Chang, and C.-H. Ku, Conception of learning physics and self-efficacy among Indonesian university students, J. Balt. Sci. Educ. 16, 7 (2017).
  102. M. A. Samsudin, S. M. Jamali, A. N. Md Zain, and N. Ale Ebrahim, The effect of STEM project based learning on self-efficacy among high-school physics students, J. Turk. Sci. Educ. 17, 94 (2020).
  103. R. Dou, E. Brewe, G. Potvin, J. P. Zwolak, and Z. Hazari, Understanding the development of interest and self-efficacy in active-learning undergraduate physics courses, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 40, 1587 (2018).
  104. S. Kapucu and E. Bahçivan, High school students’ scientific epistemological beliefs, self-efficacy in learning physics and attitudes toward physics: A structural equation model, Res. Sci. Technol. Educ. 33, 252 (2015).
  105. T. Espinosa, K. Miller, I. Araujo, and E. Mazur, Reducing the gender gap in students’ physics self-efficacy in a team- and project-based introductory physics class, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 010132 (2019).
  106. J. Durk, A. Davies, R. Hughes, and L. Jardine-Wright, Impact of an active learning physics workshop on secondary school students’ self-efficacy and ability, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 020126 (2020).
  107. Y. Li and C. Singh, Effect of gender, self-efficacy, and interest on perception of the learning environment and outcomes in calculus-based introductory physics courses, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010143 (2021).
  108. M. R. Stoeckel and G. H. Roehrig, Gender differences in classroom experiences impacting self-efficacy in an AP Physics 1 classroom, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 020102 (2021).
  109. H. D. Ahmed and G. Asiksoy, The effects of gamified flipped learning method on student’s innovation skills, self-efficacy towards virtual physics lab course and perceptions, Sustainability 13, 10163 (2021).
  110. S. Cwik and C. Singh, How the perception of the inclusiveness of the learning environment predicts female and male students’ physics self-efficacy, interest, and identity in an introductory course for bioscience majors, Electron. J. Res. Sci. Math. Educ. 27, 157 (2023).
  111. R. R. Bryan, S. M. Glynn, and J. M. Kittleson, Motivation, achievement, and advanced placement intent of high school students learning science, Sci. Educ. 95, 1049 (2011).
  112. U. Schiefele, Interest, learning, and motivation, Educ. Psychol. 26, 299 (1991).
  113. K. A. Renninger and S. Hidi, The Power of Interest for Motivation and Engagement (Routledge, New York, 2015).
  114. R. Trumper, Factors affecting junior high school students’ interest in physics, J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 15, 47 (2006).
  115. C. H. Crouch, P. Wisittanawat, M. Cai, and K. A. Renninger, Life science students’ attitudes, interest, and performance in introductory physics for life sciences: An exploratory study, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 010111 (2018).
  116. J. J. B. Harlow, D. M. Harrison, and A. Meyertholen, Correlating student interest and high school preparation with learning and performance in an introductory university physics course, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 10, 010112 (2014).
  117. B. D. Geller, C. Turpen, and C. H. Crouch, Sources of student engagement in introductory physics for life sciences, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 010118 (2018).
  118. H. B. Carlone and A. Johnson, Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 44, 1187 (2007).
  119. Z. Hazari, D. Chari, G. Potvin, and E. Brewe, The context dependence of physics identity: Examining the role of performance/competence, recognition, interest, and sense of belonging for lower and upper female physics undergraduates, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 57, 1583 (2020).
  120. Z. Hazari, R. Dou, G. Sonnert, and P. M. Sadler, Examining the relationship between informal science experiences and physics identity: Unrealized possibilities, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 18, 010107 (2022).
  121. J. Wang and Z. Hazari, Promoting high school students’ physics identity through explicit and implicit recognition, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 020111 (2018).
  122. C. A. Moss-Racusin, J. F. Dovidio, V. L. Brescoll, M. J. Graham, and J. Handelsman, Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109, 16474 (2012).
  123. M. Lorenzo, C. H. Crouch, and E. Mazur, Reducing the gender gap in the physics classroom, Am. J. Phys. 74, 118 (2006).
  124. A. Zohar and D. Sela, Her physics, his physics: Gender issues in Israeli advanced placement physics classes, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 25, 245 (2003).
  125. S. I. Hofer, Studying gender bias in physics grading: The role of teaching experience and country, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 37, 2879 (2015).
  126. B. Francis, L. Archer, J. Moote, J. DeWitt, E. MacLeod, and L. Yeomans, The construction of physics as a quintessentially masculine subject: Young people’s perceptions of gender issues in access to physics, Sex Roles 76, 156 (2017).
  127. S.-J. Leslie, A. Cimpian, M. Meyer, and E. Freeland, Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines, Science 347, 262 (2015).
  128. A. Deiglmayr, E. Stern, and R. Schubert, Beliefs in “brilliance” and belonging uncertainty in male and female STEM students, Front. Psychol. 10, 1114 (2019).
  129. M. Muradoglu, S. H. Arnold, A. Poddar, A. Stanaland, D. Yilmaz, and A. Cimpian, Why a culture of brilliance is bad for physics, Nat. Rev. Phys. 6, 75 (2024).
  130. D. K. Keblbeck, K. Piatek-Jimenez, and C. Medina Medina, Undergraduate physics students’ experiences: Exploring the impact of underrepresented identities and intersectionality, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 20, 020120 (2024).
  131. X. R. Quichocho, E. M. Schipull, and E. W. Close, Understanding physics identity development through the identity performances of Black, Indigenous, and women of color and LGBTQ+ women in physics, presented at PER Conf. 2020, virtual conference, 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Quichocho.
  132. R. M. Lock and Z. Hazari, Discussing underrepresentation as a means to facilitating female students’ physics identity development, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020101 (2016).
  133. S. Hyater-Adams, C. Fracchiolla, T. Williams, N. Finkelstein, and K. Hinko, Deconstructing Black physics identity: Linking individual and social constructs using the critical physics identity framework, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 020115 (2019).
  134. H. J. Freudenberger, Staff burn-out, J. Soc. Issues 30, 159 (1974).
  135. C. Maslach and S. E. Jackson, The measurement of experienced burnout, J. Organ. Behav. 2, 99 (1981).
  136. C. Maslach, W. B. Schaufeli, and M. P. Leiter, Job burnout, Annu. Rev. Psychol. 52, 397 (2001).
  137. W. B. Schaufeli, M. Salanova, V. González-romá, and A. B. Bakker, The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach, J. Happiness Stud. 3, 71 (2002).
  138. W. Schaufeli and D. Enzmann, The burnout companion to study and practice: A critical analysis (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2020).
  139. V. Walburg, Burnout among high school students: A literature review, Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 42, 28 (2014).
  140. T. S. Kristensen, M. Borritz, E. Villadsen, and K. B. Christensen, The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: A new tool for the assessment of burnout, Work Stress 19, 192 (2005).
  141. G. Yavuz and N. Dogan, Maslach Burnout Inventory-Student Survey (MBI-SS): A validity study, Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 116, 2453 (2014).
  142. F. Galán, A. Sanmartín, J. Polo, and L. Giner, Burnout risk in medical students in Spain using the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Student Survey, Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 84, 453 (2011).
  143. C. Hederich-Martínez and C. C. Caballero-Domínguez, Validación del cuestionario Maslach Burnout Inventory-Student Survey (MBI-SS) en contexto académico colombiano, CES Psicol. 9, 1 (2016).
  144. S. ATİK and O. T. ÇELİK, Analysis of the relationships between academic motivation, engagement, burnout, and academic achievement with structural equation modelling, Int. J. Contemp. Educ. Res. 8, 118 (2021).
  145. Y. Cong, L. Yang, and A. L. P. Ergün, Exploring the relationship between burnout, learning engagement and academic self-efficacy among EFL learners: A structural equation modeling analysis, Acta Psychol. 248, 104394 (2024).
  146. Y. Ma, The impact of academic self-efficacy, and academic motivation on Chinese EFL students’ academic burnout, Learn. Motiv. 85, 101959 (2024).
  147. Z. Rahmati, The study of academic burnout in students with high and low level of self-efficacy, Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 171, 49 (2015).
  148. E. Duru, S. Duru, and M. Balkis, Analysis of relationships among burnout, academic achievement, and self-regulation, Educ. Sci. Theory Pract. 14, 1274 (2014).
  149. Z. Liu, Y. Xie, Z. Sun, D. Liu, H. Yin, and L. Shi, Factors associated with academic burnout and its prevalence among university students: A cross-sectional study, BMC Med. Educ. 23, 360 (2023).
  150. R. N. Amelia, Literature review of academic burnout, Am. Res. J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 5, 6 (2022).
  151. T. W. Taris, Is there a relationship between burnout and objective performance? A critical review of 16 studies, Work Stress 20, 316 (2006).
  152. R. M. Ryan and E. L. Deci, Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions, Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 61, 101860 (2020).
  153. M. Gopalan and S. T. Brady, College students’ sense of belonging: A national perspective, Educ. Res. 49, 134 (2020).
  154. P. O’Keeffe, A sense of belonging: Improving student retention, Coll. Stud. J. 47, 605 (2013).
  155. R. F. Baumeister and M. R. Leary, The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation, in Interpersonal Development, edited by W. G. Graziano and M. R. Leary (Routledge, London, 2017), pp. 57–89, 10.4324/9781351153683-3.
  156. R. M. Ryan and E. L. Deci, Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being, Am. Psychol. 55, 68 (2000).
  157. R. M. Ryan and E. L. Deci, Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness (Guilford Press, New York, 2017), 10.7202/1041847ar.
  158. N. M. Webb, Peer interaction and learning in small groups, Int. J. Educ. Res. 13, 21 (1989).
  159. H. R. Tenenbaum, N. E. Winstone, P. J. Leman, and R. E. Avery, How effective is peer interaction in facilitating learning? A meta-analysis, J. Educ. Psychol. 112, 1303 (2020).
  160. C. Singh, Impact of peer interaction on conceptual test performance, Am. J. Phys. 73, 446 (2005).
  161. R. Amigues, Peer interaction in solving physics problems: Sociocognitive confrontation and metacognitive aspects, J. Exp. Child Psychol. 45, 141 (1988).
  162. L. J. Partanen, L. Myyry, and H. Asikainen, Physical chemistry students’ learning profiles and their relation to study-related burnout and perceptions of peer and self-assessment, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 25, 474 (2024).
  163. L. E. Kost, S. J. Pollock, and N. D. Finkelstein, Characterizing the gender gap in introductory physics, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 5, 010101 (2009).
  164. C. de B. Vidor, A. Danielsson, F. Rezende, and F. Ostermann, What are the problem representations and assumptions about gender underlying research on gender in physics and physics education? A systematic literature review, Rev. Bras. Pesqui. Educ. Cienc. 20, 1133 (2020).
  165. M. Stewart, Gender issues in physics education, Educ. Res. 40, 283 (1998).
  166. Z. Hazari, R. H. Tai, and P. M. Sadler, Gender differences in introductory university physics performance: The influence of high school physics preparation and affective factors, Sci. Educ. 91, 847 (2007).
  167. J. M. Nissen and J. T. Shemwell, Gender, experience, and self-efficacy in introductory physics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020105 (2016).
  168. R. H. Tai and P. M. Sadler, Gender differences in introductory undergraduate physics performance: University physics versus college physics in the USA, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 23, 1017 (2001).
  169. H. Tajfel and J. C. Turner, The social identity theory of intergroup behavior, in Political Psychology, edited by J. T. Jost and J. Sidanius (Psychology Press, New York, 2004), pp. 276–293.
  170. T. A. Brown, Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research, 2nd ed. (Guilford Press, New York, 2015).
  171. R. B. Kline, Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 5th ed. (Guilford Press, New York, 2023).
  172. D. A. Cole, J. A. Ciesla, and J. H. Steiger, The insidious effects of failing to include design-driven correlated residuals in latent-variable covariance structure analysis, Psychol. Methods 12, 381 (2007).
  173. B. M. Byrne, Structural Equation Modeling with Mplus: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming (Routledge, New York, 2012).
  174. Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China, Basic Requirements for Teaching University Physics Courses for Science and Engineering Majors (Higher Education Press, Beijing, 2010).
  175. A. G. Yong and S. Pearce, A beginner’s guide to factor analysis: Focusing on exploratory factor analysis, Tutorials Quant. Methods Psychol. 9, 79 (2013).
  176. A. W. Meade and S. B. Craig, Identifying careless responses in survey data, Psychol. Methods 17, 437 (2012).
  177. A. L. Traxler, X. C. Cid, J. Blue, and R. Barthelemy, Enriching gender in physics education research: A binary past and a complex future, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020114 (2016).
  178. Y. Li and E. Burkholder, Investigating students’ self-identified and reflected appraisal of femininity, masculinity, and androgyny in introductory physics courses, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 20, 010110 (2024).
  179. R. F. DeVellis, Scale Development: Theory and Applications, 4th ed. (Sage Publications, Los Angeles, CA, 2017).
  180. K. Salmela-Aro and S. Read, Study engagement and burnout profiles among Finnish higher education students, Burn. Res. 7, 21 (2017).
  181. G. Yang, W. Sun, and R. Jiang, Interrelationship amongst university student perceived learning burnout, academic self-efficacy, and teacher emotional support in China’s English online learning context, Front. Psychol. 13, 829193 (2022).
  182. H. Liu and Y. Zhong, English learning burnout: Scale validation in the Chinese context, Front. Psychol. 13, 1054356 (2022).
  183. A. B. Costello and J. Osborne, Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis, Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 10, 7 (2005).
  184. K. J. Preacher and A. F. Hayes, Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models, Behav. Res. Meth. Instrum. Comput. 40, 879 (2008).
  185. L. T. Hu and P. M. Bentler, Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives, Struct. Equation Model. 6, 1 (1999).
  186. J. F. Hair, W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, and R. E. Anderson, Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed. (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2010).
  187. C. Fornell and D. F. Larcker, Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error, J. Mark. Res. 18, 39 (1981).
  188. K. A. Bollen, Structural Equations with Latent Variables (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1989).
  189. A. F. Hayes, Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach, 2nd ed. (Guilford Press, New York, 2018).
  190. R. M. Baron and D. A. Kenny, The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51, 1173 (1986).
  191. G. W. Cheung and R. B. Rensvold, Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance, Struct. Equation Model. 9, 233 (2002).
  192. K. F. Osterman, Students’ need for belonging in the school community, Rev. Educ. Res. 70, 323 (2000).
  193. A. Edmondson, Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams, Administrative Sci. Q. 44, 350 (1999).
  194. J. S. Eccles and A. Wigfield, Motivational beliefs, values, and goals, Annu. Rev. Psychol. 53, 109 (2002).
  195. M. P. Leiter and C. Maslach, Burnout and engagement: Contributions to a new vision, Burn. Res. 5, 55 (2017).
  196. C. Maslach and M. P. Leiter, New insights into burnout and health care: Strategies for improving civility and alleviating burnout, Med. Teach. 39, 160 (2017).
  197. C. Maslach and M. P. Leiter, Understanding burnout: New models, in The Handbook of Stress and Health: A Guide to Research and Practice, edited by C. L. Cooper and J. C. Quick (John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 2017), pp. 36–56, 10.1002/9781118993811.ch3.
  198. R. S. Lazarus and S. Folkman, Stress, Appraisal, and Coping (Springer Publishing Company, New York, 1984).
  199. H. Tajfel and J. C. Turner, The social identity theory of intergroup behavior, in Psychology of Intergroup Relations, edited by S. Worchel and W. G. Austin (Nelson-Hall, Chicago, 1986), pp. 7–24.
  200. E. H. Erikson, Identity: Youth and Crisis (W. W. Norton & Company, New York, 1968).
  201. N. M. Else-Quest, J. S. Hyde, and M. C. Linn, Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis, Psychol. Bull. 136, 103 (2010).
  202. E. Marshman, Z. Y. Kalender, T. Nokes-Malach, C. Schunn, and C. Singh, Female students with A’s have similar physics self-efficacy as male students with C’s in introductory courses: A cause for alarm?, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 020123 (2018).
  203. Z. Y. Kalender, E. Marshman, C. D. Schunn, T. J. Nokes-Malach, and C. Singh, Why female science, technology, engineering, and mathematics majors do not identify with physics: They do not think others see them that way, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 020148 (2019).
  204. J. M. Nissen, Gender differences in self-efficacy states in high school physics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 013102 (2019).
  205. C. M. Steele and J. Aronson, Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 69, 797 (1995).
  206. A. G. Greenwald and M. R. Banaji, Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes, Psychol. Rev. 102, 4 (1995).
  207. G. J. Mellenbergh, Item bias and item response theory, Int. J. Educ. Res. 13, 127 (1989).
  208. C. West and D. H. Zimmerman, Doing gender, Gend. Soc. 1, 125 (1987).
  209. W. R. Shadish, T. D. Cook, and D. T. Campbell, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference (Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA, 2002).
  210. P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, J.-Y. Lee, and N. P. Podsakoff, Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies, J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 879 (2003).
  211. A. J. S. Morin, J. P. Meyer, J. Creusier, and F. Biétry, Multiple-group analysis of similarity in latent profile solutions, Organ. Res. Meth. 19, 231 (2016).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 22, 010106– Published 21 January, 2026
  • Received 27 August 2025
  • Accepted 5 January 2026
  • Corrected 11 August 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation