Computers & Education 77 (2014) 125133

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers & Education

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compedu

The role of academic emotions in the relationship between

perceived academic control and self-regulated learning in
online learning
Ji Won You a, *, Myunghee Kang b,1
a
Department of Early Childhood Education, Gachon University, #331 Joongang Library Bldg., 1342 Seongnamdaero, Sujeong-Gu, Seongnam-Si,
Gyeonggi-Do 461-701, Republic of Korea
b
Educational Technology Department, Ewha Womans University, #405 Education Bldg-A, 52 Ewhayeodae-gil, Seodaemoon-gu, Seoul 120-750,
Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Self-regulated learning is recognized as a critical factor for successful online learning, and students
Received 11 October 2013 perceived academic control and academic emotions are important antecedents of self-regulated learning.
Received in revised form Because emotions and cognition are interrelated, investigating the joint relationship between perceived
25 April 2014
academic control and academic emotions on self-regulated learning would be valuable to understanding
Accepted 28 April 2014
Available online 9 May 2014
the process of self-regulated learning. Therefore, this study examined the role of academic emotions
(enjoyment, anxiety, and boredom) in the relationship between perceived academic control and self-
regulated learning in online learning. The path model was proposed to test the mediating and moder-
Keywords:
Self-regulated learning ating effects of academic emotions. Data were collected from 426 Korean college students registered in
Perceived academic control online courses, and a path analysis was conducted. The results demonstrated that enjoyment mediated
Academic emotions the relationship between perceived academic control and self-regulated learning, but the moderating
Mediating effect effect of enjoyment was not signicant. Boredom and anxiety did not have signicant mediating effects
Moderating effect on self-regulated learning, whereas they showed signicant moderating effects in the relationship be-
tween perceived academic control and self-regulated learning. The role of academic emotions in learning
and their implications for facilitating students self-regulated learning in online learning were discussed
based on the ndings.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

As Internet and information technology have become more pervasive, online learning has evolved as a common and appealing way of
learning. The recent annual report on United States higher education (Allen & Seaman, 2013) species that the total enrollment in online
courses has reached 20 million, and the number of students taking at least one online course exceeds 6.7 million. This trend is not limited to
the U.S. For example, approximately 66% of post-secondary and higher education institutions in Korea offer online courses, and the number
of students taking online courses increases every year (Korea Education and Research Information Service [KERIS], 2012). In spite of the
rapid growth in the online learning rate, the quality of online learning is often criticized due to its support system, instructional design,
technological failures, instructors facilitation, and factors related to students, among others.
Researchers have attempted to identify the signicant factors that predict successful online learning (Joo, Lim, & Kim, 2011; Sun, Tsai,
Finger, Chen, & Yeh, 2008; Yukselturk & Bulut, 2007), and self-regulation has been endorsed as one key factor (Allen & Seaman, 2013;
Artino, 2008; Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2009; Puzziferro, 2008; Yukselturk & Bulut, 2007). Self-regulation in the learning context refers to
the degree to which students engage in the learning process using metacognition and proper motivation (Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons,
1988). Due to the self-directed nature of online learning, self-regulation is highly demanded in online learning even more than in

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 82 31 750 8718.

E-mail addresses: uimagine@gachon.ac.kr, you.jiwon@gmail.com (J.W. You), mhkang@ewha.ac.kr (M. Kang).
1
Tel.: 82 2 3277 2712.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.018
0360-1315/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
126 J.W. You, M. Kang / Computers & Education 77 (2014) 125133

traditional classroom learning (Artino & Stephens, 2009; Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2009). Academic leaders, however, noted that the insufcient
self-regulation of learners impeded the broad adoption of online learning in the eld (Allen & Seaman, 2013); hence, more practical im-
plications of promoting self-regulated learning should be sought.
In this study, the social cognitive model proposed by Pekrun (2006) was applied as a theoretical framework to examine the self-regulated
learning process. Pekrun posited that students experienced various discrete academic emotions based on their control and value appraisals
in the learning context; furthermore, students emotional experiences were directly related to learners self-regulation and performance.
Academic emotions in the present study refer to achievement emotions that Pekrun and his colleagues dened as emotions tied directly to
achievement activities or achievement outcomes (Pekrun, Frenzel, Goetz, & Perry, 2007, p.15). Research conrmed that academic emotions
were related to self-regulation or learning strategies (Artino & Jones, 2012; Marchand & Gutierrez, 2012; Pekrun, Goetz, Daniels, Stupnisky, &
Perry, 2010; Pekrun, Goetz, Titz, & Perry, 2002) and achievement (Artino, La Rochelle, & Durning, 2010; Pekrun et al., 2010). Furthermore,
students with high perceived control differed from those with low perceived control in terms of elaboration, motivation, and achievement
(Hall, Perry, Chippereld, Clifton, & Haynes, 2006; Perry, Hladkyj, Pekrun, & Pelletier, 2001). Therefore, perceived academic control and
academic emotions were considered as key constructs of self-regulated learning.
The social cognitive model (Pekrun, 2006) illustrated how control and value appraisals, academic emotions, and learners behaviors were
linked. At the same time, it implied that academic emotions act as mediators between control and value appraisals and learners behaviors.
In addition, Boekaerts (2007) argued that students evaluated their controllability, especially when they experienced negative emotions to
see whether they had sufcient control to address the situations. She mentioned that students performed differently corresponding to the
perception of controllability with negative emotions. This implied the interplay between emotion and cognitive information, which could
enhance, moderate or restrain motivation and behaviors in human learning (Boekaerts, 2007; Meyer & Turner, 2002; Opt Eynde, De Corte, &
Verschaffel, 2007; Ruthig et al., 2008). The discussion above suggested that academic emotions were important factors in the process of
learning, but understanding the role of academic emotions seemed complicated. Furthermore, some researchers claimed that discrete
academic emotions would have a different role and effects during the learning process (Pekrun et al., 2002). Therefore, the present study
aimed to examine the role of discrete academic emotions in the process of self-regulated learning in the online learning context. This study
focused on testing the mediating effects of academic emotions as the control-value theory posited and the moderating effects of discrete
academic emotions between perceived academic control and self-regulated learning.
Although there were various discrete emotions, three discrete academic emotions enjoyment, anxiety, and boredom were selected.
Two guidelines were applied to choose the discrete emotions. First, the most frequently reported emotions in the context of learning were
chosen (Pekrun et al., 2002). Second, in terms of valence (positive vs. negative) and activation (activating vs. deactivating) (Pekrun, 2006;
Pekrun et al., 2010), discrete emotions representing the different dimension of academic emotions were chosen. For example, enjoyment is a
positive and activating emotion; anxiety is a negative and activating emotion; boredom is a negative and deactivating emotion during
classroom learning. Research testing the joint relations of emotions is limited in the eld; thus, this study contributes to extend the un-
derstanding of the critical role of academic emotions in the self-regulated learning process as well as to propose implications for promoting
self-regulated learning in online courses.

2. Theoretical background

2.1. Self-regulated learning in online learning

Self-regulated learning is dened as an active, constructive process whereby learners set goals for their learning and then attempt to
monitor, regulate, and control their cognition, motivation, and behavior, guided and constrained by their goals and the contextual features of
the environment (Pintrich, 2000, p. 453). Typical self-regulated learners frequently utilized various cognitive and metacognitive strategies
to accomplish their learning goals; moreover, they managed time, effort, and the physical learning environment to optimize their perfor-
mance. In addition, they sought help from instructors or peers when they were faced with learning difculties (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990;
Pintrich & Garcia, 1991). More self-regulated learners usually performed better than those who were less self-regulated because self-
regulated learners actively engaged in their learning (Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1988).
The benets of self-regulated learning were also found in online learning. Yukselturk and Bulut (2007) described that successful online
learners recognized their responsibilities, reviewed the material regularly, completed assignments on time, reected on their own learning
process, and participated in online discussions. On the contrary, unsuccessful online learners did not allocate enough time to complete tasks
or to prepare for tests, and they did not put sufcient effort into studying and also failed to maintain their initial motivation throughout the
learning process. These contrasting characteristics were similar to those of self-regulated learners and non-self-regulated learners.
Furthermore, the failure in self-regulation led to academic procrastination (Ferrari, 2001; Wolters, 2003), which increased the chance of
dropouts. High procrastinators tended to disorganize their learning and use less cognitive and metacognitive strategies (Howell & Watson,
2007). Ample research in the online learning context indicated signicant relationships between self-regulated learning and achievement
(Barnard-Brak, Lan, & Paton, 2010; Bell & Akroyd, 2006; Puzziferro, 2008), persistence (Artino, 2009), and satisfaction (Artino, 2009;
Puzziferro, 2008). Overall, self-regulated learning was an important factor in successful online learning, involving learners motivation,
cognition, behavior, and performance.

2.2. Academic emotions

Emotions in academic settings were often neglected because people believed emotion was opposite to rational thinking, which hindered
effective teaching and learning (Cleveland-Innes & Campbell, 2012; Dirkx, 2008). However, emotions cannot be ignored because learning
may be either fostered or laden with emotional experience (Dirkx, 2008; Lehman, 2006). In a well-established work on academic emotions,
Pekrun and colleagues (Pekrun, 2006; Pekrun et al., 2002, 2007; Pekrun & Stephens, 2010) proposed a control-value theory that described
how discrete academic emotions were related to learning. The control-value theory explained that environmental factors such as cognitive
quality, task demands, autonomy support, and goal structures inuenced students control and value appraisals. Furthermore, students
 J.W. You, M. Kang / Computers & Education 77 (2014) 125133 127

experienced discrete emotions corresponding to their control and value appraisals. In addition, academic emotions involved with the
students use of learning strategies and self-regulation eventually inuenced their achievement. Pekrun et al. (2002) identied enjoyment,
hope, pride, relief, anxiety, anger, shame, boredom, and hopelessness as discrete academic emotions and developed the AEQ (Achievement
Emotion Questionnaire) to measure students discrete emotions in academic settings. The control value theory was tested in multiple
studies (Artino et al., 2010; Pekrun, Elliot, & Maier, 2006; Pekrun et al., 2002, 2010; Villavicencio & Bernardo, 2013), and the results sup-
ported that academic emotions played a key role in understanding students motivational beliefs, their use of learning strategies, and their
performance (Pekrun et al., 2002; Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008).
Additional studies investigated academic emotions in online learning as the learning environment expanded from a face-to-face
classroom to an online learning environment. Hara and Kling (2000) reported that frustration, isolation, anxiety, and confusion were the
most frequent feelings that learners experienced in online learning. You, Kim, and Park (2012) identied enjoyment, condence, fear,
frustration, boredom, and anxiety toward the learning system as conventional emotions in online learning. Although several different
emotions could occur due to the nature of online learning conditions, Daniels and Stupnisky (2012) articulated that control and value
appraisals were still the signicant antecedents of academic emotions in online contexts; moreover, they asserted that the control-value
theory was valid for an online learning environment.
In addition, the relationship between discrete academic emotions and self-regulated learning in the online context were examined in some
studies. Artino and Jones (2012) found that enjoyment positively predicted students elaboration and metacognition; frustration positively
predicted metacognition, whereas boredom negatively predicted metacognition. You (2012) analyzed 535 students responses from online
learning courses in Korea to examine the structural relationship among task value, self-efcacy, the classroom goal structure, academic
emotions (enjoyment, fear, and boredom), and self-regulated learning. The analysis results conveyed that experiencing enjoyment fostered
self-regulated learning; however, fear and boredom did not signicantly inuence self-regulated learning. She also found that task value, self-
efcacy, and the classroom goal structure were signicant antecedents of discrete academic emotions. In summary, previous research has
supported the control-value theory in either online or ofine learning and implied that discrete emotions had different effects on learning.

2.3. Perceived academic control

Perceived control is an individuals believed capacity to predict and inuence events in their environment (Stupnisky, Perry, Hall, &
Guay, 2012, p. 81). Perceiving academic control in a learning condition is seen as an important predictor of achievement emotions
(Pekrun, 2006), academic motivation (Martinez, 2003) and performance (Perry et al., 2001; Ruthig et al., 2008). Research revealed that
perceived academic control positively predicted academic achievement of rst-year college students (Perry et al., 2001) and dropouts
(Morris, Wu, & Finnegan, 2005). Similarly, Joo, Joung, and Sim (2011) addressed that perceiving the internal locus of control in the online
learning context fostered learning ow and learning persistence. The authors discussed that perceiving the internal locus of control allowed
the learners to recognize their responsibilities in online learning and to persist in their learning.
In addition, some researchers have investigated the relationships among academic control, academic emotions, and learning. Assor,
Kaplan, Kanat-Maymon, and Roth (2005) examined how teachers direct control of behaviors was associated with negative emotions,
learners motivation and academic engagement. The results showed that such teachers controlling behaviors engendered students anger
and anxiety and also led to amotivation and extrinsic motivation. Perry et al. (2001) also reported that students who perceived a low level of
academic control experienced more boredom and anxiety, were less motivated, put forward less effort, and used fewer learning strategies
than those who perceived high academic control. In summary, these ndings suggested that perceived academic control had a signicant
relationship with academic emotions, motivation, and the use of learning strategies.

2.4. Academic emotions as a mediator and a moderator in learning

Academic emotions in the control-value theory (Pekrun, 2006) were posited as mediators in the learning process. The evidence showed
signicant relationships between control and value appraisal and discrete academic emotions (Assor et al., 2005; You, 2012). Moreover,
positive emotions such as enjoyment, pride, and hope often showed an enhancement of motivation and the use of learning strategies, but
negative emotions were known to impair learning in previous studies. However, Pekrun, Elliot, and Maier (2009) noted that the detailed
effects of discrete emotions in the literature were not consistent across the studies and emphasized the need for more empirical research
clarifying the role of academic emotions in the learning process because there was a lack of evidence between discrete emotions and
performance, except in the case of anxiety. They proposed the path model that consisted of achievement goals, academic emotions, and
performance and investigated academic emotions as mediators in the relationship between achievement goals and academic performance.
They found that positive discrete emotions except enjoyment positively predicted academic performance attainment, and negative emo-
tions including boredom, anger, anxiety, hopeless, and shame negatively predicted academic attainment. They concluded that academic
emotions played a mediating role in the relationship between achievement goals and performance.
Boekaerts (2007) highlighted the reciprocal relationship between negative emotions and controllability in self-regulated learning. She
described that if students appraised learning activities positively, they were more motivated to engage in tasks. However, students who
perceived that the tasks were not congruent with their personal interests or goals experienced negative emotions, and this discouraged the
students from concentrating on learning. Rather, it initiated another appraisal process. Because students considered negative emotions as a
potential threat, they started to appraise whether they had sufcient resources to cope with these negative emotional experiences. Students
who perceived the condition as controllable could redirect their attention to their learning, whereas others suffered and failed to engage in
learning. This implied the interaction between perceived control and emotions, which could affect self-regulated learning, and suggested
that the effects of emotions should be investigated by incorporating them with cognitive information.
Because academic emotions were linked with cognition, Ruthig et al. (2008) investigated academic emotions as moderators in the
learning process. They examined the joint effects between perceived academic control and emotions on rst-year college students learning
achievement and attrition. They found that positive emotions boosted the benets of perceiving high control, but negative emotions
128 J.W. You, M. Kang / Computers & Education 77 (2014) 125133

restrained them. These results supported the notion that discrete emotions moderated the relationship between perceived academic control
and achievement or attrition and also revealed the moderating role of academic emotions.

2.5. Research questions

The purpose of the study was to investigate the mediating and moderating roles of academic emotions (enjoyment, anxiety, and
boredom) in the relationship between students perceived academic control and self-regulated learning in online learning. Analyzing the
mediation and moderation of academic emotions together would promote the understanding of academic emotions in learning. Further-
more, examining specic discrete emotions with academic control and self-regulated learning would clarify the distinct effect of discrete
academic emotions in the learning process. The main research questions for this study are as follows, and the proposed path model is
presented in Fig. 1.

1. How are perceived academic control and discrete academic emotions (enjoyment, anxiety, and boredom) related to self-regulated
learning in online learning?
2. Do discrete academic emotions (enjoyment, anxiety, and boredom) mediate the relationship between perceived academic control and
self-regulated learning in online learning?
3. Do discrete academic emotions (enjoyment, anxiety, and boredom) moderate the relationship between perceived academic control and
self-regulated learning in online learning?

3. Method

3.1. Participants and procedure

The study was conducted at a mid-sized private university located near Seoul, Korea. Although the university is not an online
institution, the school offers several online elective courses every semester. With convenient sampling, two online learning courses were
chosen from the rst semester in 2012. The titles of the courses were introduction to color, a three-credit elective course, and there was
no prerequisite. One instructor taught two online learning courses for a total of 15 weeks in a similar way. A total of 571 undergraduates
registered for the courses. The students were required to watch the weekly scheduled online lecture videos, complete four assignments,
and take two ofine examinations. The students used an online Q&A board, a discussion board, and email when they had questions and
issues. When a student asked questions on the message board, other students sometimes elaborated or replied to the questions as well
as the instructor. All of the learning activities occurred online except for the two ofine exams. The evaluation of the course was based
on attendance, midterm and nal exams, and assignments. Weekly attendance was checked automatically by the learning management
system. Attendance was determined in terms of regular study and the time spent on the learning materials. The same requirements
were applied in both classes, and both the midterm and nal exams were administered on campus at the same time regardless of the
classes.
The online survey was conducted at the end of the semester (week 13week 15), and participation of the study was voluntary. A total of
426 cases were collected (response rate: 74%) and used for the study. Among the participants, 184 were women (43.2%) and 242 were men
(56.8%), and the mean age of the participants was 24.6 years (SD 2.7, range 2042). The participants included 248 seniors (58.2%), 89
juniors (20.9%), 57 sophomores (13.4%), and 32 freshmen (7.5%). Their majors varied, including computer science, fashion design, chemistry,
administration, business, and interactive media, among others.

3.2. Instruments

The online survey was composed of 27 items. All items were in Korean and used a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1
(completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree).

Fig. 1. The hypothesized path model.

 J.W. You, M. Kang / Computers & Education 77 (2014) 125133 129

3.2.1. Perceived academic control

To measure the students perceived academic control (PAC), the items from Stupnisky, Renaud, Daniels, Haynes, and Perry (2008) were
translated into Korean and modied. The scale consisted of eight items (e.g., I have a great deal of control over my academic performance in
this course); Cronbachs a coefcient of this scale was .81.

3.2.2. Academic emotions in online learning

To measure participants enjoyment, boredom, and anxiety, the subscales from the e-Learning Academic Emotions Scale (You et al., 2012)
were used. The scale (e-AES) was developed for measuring the discrete academic emotions of online learning students. It was adapted from
the Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (Pekrun et al., 2002) and was validated for Korean online learners. The scale consisted of six
subscales: enjoyment, condence, fear, frustration, boredom, and learning environment anxiety. Enjoyment, boredom, and fear were
selected among these subscales. Four items were used to measure enjoyment (Cronbachs a .87), and a sample item was I enjoy being in
the class. To measure boredom, three items were used (Cronbachs a .84), and a sample item was Because I am so bored during the online
lecture, I frequently check the time. Three items from the fear scale were used to measure anxiety (Cronbachs a .65), and a sample item
was I am worried that I might say something wrong, so Id rather not express my opinion.

3.2.3. Self-regulated learning

To measure self-regulated learning, the online self-regulated learning scale used by Kim (2010) was used. This scale was developed for
the online learning context and was validated for Korean adult learners. The scale is frequently used in online learning research in Korea, and
sample items were I access the online course and study the materials regularly, and I organize things or nd appropriate places to
concentrate on the course. Nine items were used, and Cronbachs a coefcient of this scale was .87.

3.3. Data analysis

The collected data were analyzed using SPSS 18.0 and AMOS 18.0 (Arbuckle, 2009). Descriptive statistics and the reliability test of each
variable were conducted. In addition, a path analysis was performed to test the mediation and moderation effects of discrete emotions
(enjoyment, boredom, and anxiety) in the relationship between perceived academic control and self-regulated learning. Although path
analysis itself does not conrm causality among variables, path models that researchers proposed can be tested, and direct and indirect
effects among variables can be identied (Lleras, 2005). Furthermore, because mediation and moderation effects were tested in a single
analysis in the present study, it would be benecial in terms of reecting theory-driven ideas and empirical evidence (Fairchild &
MacKinnon, 2009). As part of the moderation analysis, all variables were mean-centered prior to the analysis to avoid multicollinearity
among variables (Aiken & West, 1991), and three product terms were generated by multiplying the centered PAC score and the centered
discrete academic emotion scores. In this study, a maximum-likelihood (ML) estimation was used for estimation, and a bootstrapping
method with a condence interval was used to test indirect effects. The signicance level of .05 was used for the analysis.

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive statistics

The descriptive statistics of perceived academic control (M 5.27, SD .87), enjoyment (M 4.17, SD 1.00), anxiety (M 3.65,
SD 1.04), boredom (M 3.62, SD 1.27), and self-regulated learning (M 4.86, SD .89) as well as the correlations between the variables
are summarized in Table 1. The mean of PAC was 5.27, which indicated that participants had high perceived academic control. Anxiety and
boredom were less than 4.00, which showed that students experienced negative emotions to a lesser extent. The skewness and kurtosis of
each variable were examined to check for multivariate normality. The absolute values of skewness ranged from .04 to .41, and the absolute
values of kurtosis ranged from .20 to 1.34. If the values did not exceed a univariate skewness of 2.0 and a univariate of kurtosis of 7.0, it was
assumed that there was no critical problem regarding multivariate normality (Curran, West, & Finch, 1996). For the estimation method, a
maximum likelihood estimation was selected. A signicant positive correlation was found between PAC and self-regulation (r .52, p < .01),
and the correlations between self-regulation and enjoyment, anxiety, and boredom were r .53 (p < .01), r .26 (p < .01), and r .47
(p < .01), respectively.

4.2. Path analysis

4.2.1. Direct effects among perceived academic control, academic emotions, and self-regulated learning
The proposed model that allowed correlations between mediators residuals and product terms was tested. It was considered acceptable
to correlate because product terms were generated by multiplying an exogenous variable and mediators. The path model yielded good t

Table 1
Descriptive statistics and zero-order correlations of study variables (n 426).

Variable Mean SD Skewness Kurtosis 1 2 3 4

1. Perceived academic control (PAC) 5.27 .87 .04 .71 1

2. Enjoyment 4.17 1.00 .12 1.34 .34** 1
3. Anxiety 3.65 1.04 .26 .26 .27** .06 1
4. Boredom 3.62 1.27 .06 .20 .34** .67** .31** 1
5. Self-regulated learning 4.86 .89 .41 .23 .52** .53** .26** .47**

*p < .05, **p < .01.

130 J.W. You, M. Kang / Computers & Education 77 (2014) 125133

Fig. 2. The estimated standard direct path coefcients in the path model.

indices except c2. However, many researchers (e.g., Bentler & Bonnet, 1980; Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2009) suggested using multiple
model t indices, including Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), a Comparative Fit Index (CFI), or the TuckerLewis Index
(TLI), when evaluating a model because c2 was too sensitive to the sample size. Model t indices of the path model were c2 (6,
N 426) 18.97, CFI .99, TLI .95, RMSEA .07, which indicated adequate model t.
The estimated direct path coefcients in the path model were examined (see Fig. 2). As shown in Table 2, perceived academic control
(PAC) positively predicted enjoyment (B .36, p < .001) and self-regulated learning (B .36, p < .001), and it negatively predicted boredom
(B .46, p < .001) and anxiety (B .32, p < .001). In addition, enjoyment positively predicted self-regulated learning (B .27, p < .001)
but the relationship between boredom and self-regulated learning was not signicant, nor was the relationship between anxiety and self-
regulated learning. Furthermore, the PAC  boredom product term (B .14, p < .001) and the PAC  anxiety product term (B .10,
p < .05) were signicant to predict self-regulated learning. However, PAC  enjoyment (B .07, p .13) was not signicant at the sig-
nicance level of .05. The results indicated that boredom and anxiety had signicant moderating effects in the relationship between PAC and
self-regulated learning.

4.2.2. Interpretation of moderating effects with simple slopes

From the path analysis results, boredom and anxiety exhibited signicant moderating effects. To interpret the moderating effects clearly,
simple regression slopes were created in Figs. 3 and 4. The simple slopes illustrated the predicted relationship between a predictor and a
dependent variable at the low and high levels of the moderator. The plotting method suggested by Cohen, Cohen, West, and Aiken (2003)
was used, and 1 SD the mean were generally represented as the high and low levels. As shown in Fig. 3, the slopes were different between
low and high boredom, which indicated that the association between PAC and self-regulated learning differed signicantly at different levels
of boredom. In particular, students who experienced low boredom with high PAC demonstrated high self-regulated learning; however,
students who experienced high boredom did not receive a great deal of benet of perceiving high academic control.
The simple slope of anxiety was presented in Fig. 4. As shown in Fig. 4, the slopes between low anxiety and high anxiety were different,
and there was a synergistic effect between perceiving high academic control and low anxiety on self-regulated learning.

4.2.3. Indirect effect of perceived academic control on self-regulated learning

The mediating effects of academic emotions were tested by analyzing the indirect effect of perceived academic control on self-regulated
learning. In the path model, perceived academic control had both a direct effect and an indirect effect on self-regulated learning. A boot-
strapping method was used to estimate and test the indirect effect, and a bootstrapped 95% condence interval was reported in Table 3. The

Table 2
Path analysis results (n 426).

Path B SE t
Perceived academic control (PAC) / enjoyment .36 .04 .31 7.18***
PAC / boredom .46 .06 .32 7.17***
PAC / anxiety .32 .05 .26 6.02***
PAC / self-regulated learning .36 .04 .37 9.12***
Enjoyment / self-regulated learning .27 .05 .31 5.68***
Boredom / self-regulated learning .06 .04 .08 1.59
Anxiety / self-regulated learning .06 .04 .07 1.68
PAC  enjoyment / self-regulated learning .07 .05 .08 1.52
PAC  boredom / self-regulated learning .14 .04 .19 3.44***
PAC  anxiety / self-regulated learning .10 .04 .11 2.57*

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

 J.W. You, M. Kang / Computers & Education 77 (2014) 125133 131

Fig. 3. Boredom as a moderator of the relationship between PAC and self-regulated learning.

indirect effect of PAC on self-regulated learning was signicant (B .14, p < .01) and the 95% condence interval did not include 0 (.11.19),
so the magnitude of the indirect effect was concluded signicant. This result meant that perceived academic control had a signicant in-
direct effect on self-regulated learning, mediated by enjoyment, anxiety, and boredom. Therefore, perceived academic control had a direct
effect (B .36, .37) and an indirect effect (B .14, .14) on self-regulated learning, which summed a total effect size of .50.

5. Discussion

The purpose of the present study was to examine the role of academic emotions in the process of self-regulated learning. Among the
discrete academic emotions, enjoyment, anxiety, and boredom were chosen for the study. The research was conducted for 426 Korean
college students who attended a traditional ofine university and were registered for online learning courses. From the results of the path
analysis, perceived academic control had a signicant association with academic emotions and self-regulated learning as predicted. These
results were in line with previous research and supported the control-value theory (Assor et al., 2005; Perry et al., 2001; You, 2012). In
addition, enjoyment was positively related to self-regulated learning, whereas boredom and anxiety did not show a signicant relationship
with self-regulated learning. These results are partially consistent with previous research (Artino & Jones, 2012; You, 2012). Furthermore,
the current study probed the moderation effects of academic emotions, and the results showed that boredom and anxiety revealed the
signicant moderating effects on self-regulated learning; however, enjoyment did not have a signicant moderating effect. The ndings
were generally consistent with those of Ruthig et al. (2008), which portrayed that negative emotions restrained the benets of perceiving
high academic control. The indirect effect of perceived academic control on self-regulated learning mediated by academic emotions was
signicant. Although there were three mediators in the study, a separated mediation test was not performed. However, the direct path from
boredom to self-regulated learning and the direct path from anxiety to self-regulated learning were not signicant; thus, enjoyment was
assumed to be a signicant mediator from the results. Overall, the ndings elaborated the process of self-regulated learning in online
learning and contributed to empirically recognizing the different roles of discrete academic emotions in learning.
The ndings from the present study provided several implications. First, academic emotions showed the roles of both mediation and
moderation on self-regulated learning. In this study, enjoyment played a mediating role, whereas boredom and anxiety played a moderating
role in the relationship between perceived academic control and self-regulated learning. Although detecting interaction or moderating
effects in a non-experimental study was considered difcult (Aiken & West, 1991; McClelland & Judd, 1993; Ruthig et al., 2008), our ndings
revealed the moderating role of academic emotions. The evidence of the mediating and moderating effects may provide a possible
explanation for the non-signicant relationship observed or mixed results in the previous studies (Artino & Jones, 2012; You, 2012) and
suggests that researchers consider the joint relationships between emotions and cognition when they examine the effects of emotions in
learning.
Second, not only perceiving control but also lessening negative emotions is required to promote self-regulated learning. From the
moderation analysis, the relationship between perceived academic control and self-regulated learning differed substantially at different
levels of boredom and anxiety. Students may perceive higher levels of academic control because the online learning environment

Fig. 4. Anxiety as a moderator of the relationship between PAC and self-regulated learning.
132 J.W. You, M. Kang / Computers & Education 77 (2014) 125133

Table 3
Indirect effect of PAC on self-regulated learning (n 426).

Indirect effect B SE 95% CI

Bootstrap percentile
PAC / self-regulated learning .14** .04 .14 .11, .19

*p < .05, **p < .01.

considerably provides students with more control. However, the ndings demonstrated that having high academic control itself was not
sufcient to facilitate self-regulated learning. The students who perceived high negative emotions with high academic control did not
exhibit the benet of having high academic control. Therefore, instructors or tutors in online learning courses need to make effort to reduce
learners negative emotions and promote their awareness of controllability.
Third, the results bring greater attention to discrete academic emotions. Because enjoyment had a signicant mediating effect, whereas
anxiety and boredom served as moderators, discrete academic emotions had a different role and effect in the learning process. Therefore, it
is necessary to understand specic discrete emotions and provide different implications corresponding to a specic emotion. For example,
anxiety and boredom are both negative emotions; however, the suggestions to reduce them are different. Boredom is a deactivating
emotion, which leads learners to be disengaged. Instructors need to provide interesting and useful learning tasks to students so that
students are able to perceive the value of the tasks. Some studies discussed that students experienced boredom when they dealt with not
only over-challenging tasks but also under-challenging tasks (Acee et al., 2010; Pekrun et al., 2002); hence, instructors need to identify the
level of the learners capabilities and provide tasks that are reasonably challenging. Contrastingly, anxiety, an activating emotion, is induced
if students focus on failure in their achievement. Self-efcacy and controllability are closely related to anxiety, and anxiety is dependent on
individual achievement goals, especially performanceavoidance goals (Pekrun et al., 2006; You, 2012) and performanceapproach goals
(You, 2012). Therefore, teachers may not overly emphasize learning for achievement rather than mastery and need to generate a supportive
classroom climate to reduce anxiety. Furthermore, the importance of enjoyment in learning should not be neglected. Although enjoyment
did not have a signicant moderating effect, it had a strong positive relationship with self-regulated learning. Therefore, greater attention on
positive emotions is suggested.
Fourth, the importance of perceiving academic control should be recognized. Perceiving control was signicantly and positively asso-
ciated with self-regulated learning, and students who perceived high academic control generally reported higher self-regulated learning
than those who perceived low academic control even though the relationship between perceived academic control and self-regulated
learning was moderated by emotions. This supports that perceiving academic control is a positive predictor of learners engagement and
performance. Therefore, instructors need to provide guidance and performance standards clearly so that students can predict their learning
outcomes and recognize their control in the learning process (Ruthig et al., 2008).

6. Limitations and future directions

Although the present study expands the understanding of relationship among perceived academic control, academic emotions, and self-
regulation in the online learning environment, several limitations are concerned and should direct future research. First, because academic
emotion in the learning process is tangled with other variables, clarifying the role of academic emotions is not simple. Therefore, more
empirical research on investigating the effects of discrete academic emotions is required to corroborate our ndings. In particular, research
on examining academic emotions as moderators was very limited; thus, further studies with various samples and contexts would help to
enrich the literature of academic emotions. Second, the moderating effect of enjoyment was not signicant in the study. Considering the
difculties of detecting interactive effects in the eld of research, the moderating effect of enjoyment should be investigated in future
studies. Third, this study did not include value appraisal in the research design, although control-value theory was part of the theoretical
framework. Therefore, the ndings should be interpreted with caution. Last, it should be noted that data were collected from week 1315
during the course, and the perception of the research variables might differ at other points. In addition, all of the measures in the study were
conducted by a self-reported questionnaire; hence, the limitations of using indirect measurement apply. In future studies, using observed
performance data such as grades or achievement scores would contribute to clarifying the relationship among academic control, academic
emotions, and performance.

References

Acee, T. W., Kim, H., Kim, H., Kim, J., Chu, H. R., Kim, M., et al. (2010). Academic boredom in under- and over-challenging situations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35,
1727.
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regressions: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, London: Sage.
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. Retrieved July 24, 2013, from http://sloanconsortium.org/
publications/survey/changing_course_2012.
Arbuckle, J. L. (2009). AMOS (Version 18.0) [Computer software]. Chicago, IL: Amos Development Corporation.
Artino, A. R. (2008). Promoting academic motivation and self-regulation: practical guidelines for online instructors. TechTrends, 52(3), 3745.
Artino, A. R. (2009). Think, feel, act: motivational and emotional inuences on military students online academic success. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21, 146
166.
Artino, A. R., & Jones, K. D. (2012). Exploring the complex relations between achievement emotions and self-regulated learning behaviors in online learning. Internet and
Higher Education, 15, 170175.
Artino, A. R., La Rochelle, J. S., & Durning, S. J. (2010). Second-year medical students motivational beliefs, emotions, and achievement. Medical Education, 44, 12031212.
Artino, A. R., & Stephens, J. M. (2009). Beyond grades in online learning: adaptive proles of academic self-regulation among naval academy undergraduates. Journal of
Advanced Academics, 20, 568601.
Assor, A., Kaplan, H., Kanat-Maymon, Y., & Roth, G. (2005). Directly controlling teacher behaviors as predictors of poor motivation and engagement in girls and boys: the role
of anger and anxiety. Learning and Instruction, 15, 397413.
Barnard-Brak, L., Lan, W. Y., & Paton, V. O. (2010). Proles in self-regulated learning in the online learning environment. International Review of Research in Open and Distance
Learning, 11(1), 6179.
 J.W. You, M. Kang / Computers & Education 77 (2014) 125133 133

Bell, P. D., & Akroyd, D. (2006). Can factors related to self-regulated learning predict learning achievement in undergraduate asynchronous Web-based courses? International
Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 3(10), 516.
Bentler, P., & Bonnet, D. (1980). Signicance tests and goodness-of-t in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588606.
Boekaerts, M. (2007). Understanding students affective processes in the classroom. In P. A. Schutz, & R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in education: Educational psychology series (pp.
3756). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
Cleveland-Innes, M., & Campbell, P. (2012). Emotional presence, learning, and the online learning environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance
Learning, 13(4), 269292.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specication error in conrmatory factory analysis. Psychological Methods,
1(1), 1629.
Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2009). Exploring how experienced online instructors use integrative learning technologies to support self-regulated learning. International
Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 5(2), 154168.
Daniels, L. M., & Stupnisky, R. H. (2012). Not that different in theory: discussing the control-value theory of emotions in online learning environments. Internet and Higher
Education, 15, 222226.
Dirkx, J. M. (2008). The meaning and role of emotions in adult learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 120, 717.
Fairchild, A. J., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2009). A general model for testing mediation and moderation effects. Prevention Science, 10(2), 8799.
Ferrari, J. R. (2001). Procrastination as self-regulation failure of performance: effects of cognitive load, self-awareness, and time limits on working best under pressure.
European Journal of Personality, 15, 391406.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Hall, N. C., Perry, R. P., Chippereld, J. G., Clifton, R. A., & Haynes, T. L. (2006). Enhancing primary and secondary control in at-risk college students through writing-based
attributional retraining. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25(4), 361391.
Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2000). Students distress with a web-based distance education course: an ethnographic study of participants experiences. Information, Communication
and Society, 3(4), 557579.
Howell, A. J., & Watson, D. C. (2007). Procrastination: associations with achievement goal orientation and learning strategies. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 167
178.
Joo, Y. J., Joung, S., & Sim, W. J. (2011). Structural relationships among internal locus of control, institutional support, ow, and learner persistence in cyber universities.
Computer in Human Behavior, 27, 714722.
Joo, Y. J., Lim, K. Y., & Kim, E. K. (2011). Online university students satisfaction and persistence: examining perceived level of presence, usefulness and ease of use as predictors
in a structural model. Computer & Education, 57, 16541664.
Kim, S. N. (2010). The structural relationship among the variables related to learning transfer in corporate e-learning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Korea: Ewha Womans
University.
Korea Education and Research Information Service. (2012). Academic information statistics system. Retrieved July 29, 2013, from http://www.rinfo.kr.
Lehman, R. (2006). The role of emotion in creating instructor and learner presence in the distance education experience. Journal of Cognitive Affective Learning, 2(2), 1226.
Lleras, C. (2005). Path analysis. Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, 3, 2530.
Marchand, G. C., & Gutierrez, A. P. (2012). The role of emotion in the learning process: comparisons between online and face-to-face learning settings. Internet and Higher
Education, 15, 150160.
Martinez, M. (2003). High attrition rate in e-learning: challenging, predictors, and solutions. The eLearning Developers Journal, 17.
McClelland, G. H., & Judd, C. M. (1993). Statistical difculties of detecting interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 376390.
Meyer, D. K., & Turner, J. C. (2002). Discovering emotion in classroom motivation research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 107114.
Morris, L. V., Wu, S., & Finnegan, C. L. (2005). Predicting retention in online general education courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 2336.
Opt Eynde, P., De Corte, E., & Verschaffel, L. (2007). Students emotions: a key components of self-regulated learning? In P. A. Schutz, & R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in education:
Educational psychology series (pp. 185204) San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology
Review, 18, 315341.
Pekrun, R., Elliot, A., & Maier, M. A. (2006). Achievement goals and discrete achievement emotions: a theoretical model and prospective test. Journal of Educational Psychology,
98(3), 583597.
Pekrun, R., Elliot, A., & Maier, M. A. (2009). Achievement goals and achievement emotions: testing a model of their joint relations with academic performance. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 101(1), 115135.
Pekrun, R., Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., & Perry, R. P. (2007). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: an integrative approach to emotions in education. In P. A. Schutz, &
R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in education: Educational psychology series (pp. 1336). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Daniels, L. M., Stupnisky, R. H., & Perry, R. P. (2010). Boredom in achievement settings: exploring control-value antecedents and performance outcomes of
a neglected emotion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 531549.
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students self-regulated learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative
research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91105.
Pekrun, R., & Stephens, E. J. (2010). Achievement emotions: a control-value approach. Social & Personality Psychology Compass, 4(4), 238255.
Perry, R. P., Hladkyj, S., Pekrun, R. H., & Pelletier, S. T. (2001). Academic control and action control in the achievement of college students: a longitudinal eld study. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 93(4), 776789.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), The handbook of self-regulation: Theory, research,
and applications (pp. 451502). San Diego: Academic Press.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33
40.
Pintrich, P. R., & Garcia, T. (1991). Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. In M. L. Maehr, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and
achievement: Goals and self-regulatory processes (Vol. 7); (pp. 371402). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Puzziferro, M. (2008). Online technologies self-efcacy and self-regulated learning as predictors of nal grade and satisfaction in college-level online courses. American
Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 7289.
Ruthig, J. C., Perry, R. P., Hladkyj, S., Hall, N. C., Pekrun, R., & Chippereld, J. G. (2008). Perceived control and emotions: interactive effects on performance in achievement
settings. Social Psychology of Education, 11(2), 161180.
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stupnisky, R. H., Perry, R. P., Hall, N. C., & Guay, F. (2012). Examining perceived control level and instability as predictors of rst-year college students academic achievement.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 7190.
Stupnisky, R. H., Renaud, R. D., Daniels, L. M., Haynes, T. L., & Perry, R. P. (2008). The interrelation of rst-year college students critical thinking disposition, perceived academic
control, and academic achievement. Research in Higher Education, 49, 513530.
Sun, P. C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y. Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors inuencing learner
satisfaction. Computer & Education, 50(4), 11831202.
Villavicencio, F. T., & Bernardo, A. B. I. (2013). Positive academic emotions moderate the relationship between self-regulated and academic achievement. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 83, 329340.
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Understanding procrastination from self-regulated learning perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 179187.
You, J. (2012). The structural relationship among task value, self-efcacy, goal structure, and academic emotions for promoting self-regulated learning in e-learning course.
The Journal of Korean Association of Computer Education, 16(4), 6177.
You, J., Kim, H., & Park, S. H. (2012). Development and construct validation of e-learning academic emotion scale (e-AES). The Journal of Yeolin Education, 20(3), 1944.
Yukselturk, E., & Bulut, S. (2007). Predictors for student success in an online course. Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 7183.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 284290.