Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between perceived academic self efficacy and

psychological well-being, using a sample of Turkish undergraduate students. To undercover such

relationship we have used Academic Self Efficacy Scale and Life Satisfaction and Positive

Effect Scales,

Introduction

Academic Self Efficacy

Methods

Measures Academic Self Efficacy Scale which consists of 19 items was used to measure

participants academic self efficacy level. Participants rated on a 5-point scale (1 = strongly

disagree, 5 = strongly agree) their agreement with confidence about their abilities to achieve

certain academic tasks. Life Satisfaction and Positive Effect Scales were used to assess

psychological well-being. Participants rated on a 7-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 =

strongly agree) their subjective well-being and positive emotional experiences. Each scale was

adapted to Turkish using a translation-back translation method.

Participants 59 undergraduate students participated in the survey. Data from 11 participants

were excluded due to incomplete responses and data from 2 participants were excluded due to

the incorrect answer given to the attention check question. The final sample consisted of 46

participants (Mage = 22.2, SDage = 0.8; range 20 to 25 years; 72% female; 72% senior year)

shown in Table 1. The sample size is determined based on a previous study in the literature that

investigates academic self-efficacy and year of degree relationship in college students (Caroli &

Sagone, 2014). For a correlation analysis, as suggested by G*Power Software, the total sample

size was determined 39 with the effect size r = .38, alpha = .05, and power = .80. Inclusion

criteria for this study were: being a native Turkish speaker and being an undergraduate student

enrolled in a university.

Procedure Questionnaire was administered online through an internet link to the survey using

WhatsApp groups and social media. After completing the consent form and reading the

instructions, participants answered demographic questions on gender, study major, GPA and year

of degree. The participants first completed the Academic Self Efficacy Scale, and then the Life
Satisfaction & Positive Affect scales. The questionnaire additionally included one question for

attention check. Participants received a debriefing statement after the completion of the

questionnaire. Participation of the survey was entirely voluntary.

Age Year GPA Academic Psychological

(out of 5) (out of 4) self-efficacy well-being
(out of 5) (out of 5)
mean 22.2 4.6 3.25 3.7 3.16
SD 1.05 0.75 0.39 0.55 0.78
minimum 20 2 1.88 2.44 2
maximum 25 5 4.72 4.07 4.07
Table 1. Descriptive statistics

Results

Data and statistical analyses The data was exported to JASP after ineligible participants’ data

were removed for further analysis. All measures were converted into standard scores. The means

for academic self efficacy and psychological well being scores were created as two new

variables. Two separate correlation analyses were conducted to test the relationship between

mean academic self efficacy and mean psychological well-being; and the relationship between

year of degree and mean academic self efficacy.

Academic self efficacy and psychological well-being Correlation analyses on JASP showed that

there is a moderate positive association between academic self efficacy (Macademic = 3.73,

SDage = 0.55) and psychological well-being (Mpsy = 4.43, SDpsy = 0.78), r = .453, p = .002.) as

shown in Table 2 and Figure 1. Thus, the hypothesis that there is a positive relationship between

academic self efficacy and psychological well-being in university students appears to receive

support.
Academic self efficacy and level of degree Correlation analyses on JASP showed no significant

relationship between mean academic self-efficacy and year of academic degree, r = - .056, p

= .713 as shown in Table 2 and Figure 2. Thus, there is no evidence supporting the hypothesis

that year of academic degree is associated with academic self-efficacy level in university

students.

Academic self-efficacy Year of degree

Pearson’s r .45 -.56
p value .002* .71
Table 2. Correlation analyses

Figure 1. Correlation between academic self-efficacy and psychological well-being

Figure 2. Correlation between academic self-efficacy and academic year of degree
Discussion

Findings and predictions The present study investigated the relationship between academic self-

efficacy and psychological well-being in university students. The results of the analyses revealed

a significant association between these two variables, aligning with our hypothesis that an

increase in academic self-efficacy is associated with an increase in psychological well-being.

This finding supports that individuals with a strong belief in their academic abilities tend to

experience higher levels of overall well-being.

Our initial hypothesis also proposed a potential relationship between academic self-efficacy and

year of degree. However, the results did not provide evidence to support this hypothesis. The

absence of a significant association between academic self-efficacy and year of degree suggests

that the progression through different years of college does not have a direct impact on one's

belief in their academic capabilities. These findings indicate that year of degree is not a

contributing factor to academic self-efficacy, contrary to our predictions.

Strengths and limitations of the current study The study has several strengths that enhance the

reliability and validity of the findings. Firstly, well-established scales were employed in the

measurement of academic self-efficacy and psychological well-being, which have been

previously used in literature. Thus, measures utilized in the study have undergone rigorous

testing and have demonstrated good psychometric properties, increasing the confidence in the

obtained results. Another strength of the study is the consideration of sample size and effect size

calculations. Adequate attention was given to determining an appropriate sample size to achieve

sufficient statistical power for the analyses. By considering effect sizes, the study aimed to

ensure that any observed relationships between variables were not merely due to chance but
represented meaningful associations. Furthermore, the methods employed in the study were

conducted transparently and with the aid of reliable analysis methods on JASP which is a

reputable software program widely used in scientific research. These strengths enhance the

credibility of the findings, providing a solid foundation for understanding the relationship

between academic self-efficacy and psychological well-being in university students.

There are several limitations of the current study. Firstly, the sample size was relatively small,

which may limit the generalizability of the findings to a larger population. The study also

focused primarily on psychology students in their final year of college, which further restricts the

generalizability of the results to other degree levels or disciplines. The limited variation in degree

types hampers drawing broad conclusions about the relationship between year of degree and

perceived academic success among university students. Furthermore, the study relied on self-

report measures administered online, which introduces potential biases and limitations. The

absence of a controlled laboratory environment may have influenced participant responses and

introduced confounding variables that were not accounted for in the study design. While

attention checks and randomization were implemented to enhance data quality, the use of self-

report measures and online administration can still pose challenges in terms of response validity

and reliability. Additionally, the present study was unable to control for any possible

confounding variables that may be relevant to the variables considering the age group such as

depression or anxiety.

Overall, the present study is constrained by its small sample size, limited variation in participant

characteristics, and the use of self-report measures administered online. These limitations restrict
the generalizability of the findings and emphasize the need for caution when interpreting the

results.

Future directions To expand on the findings of this study and address its limitations, future

research should consider firstly, replication with a larger and more diverse sample that would

enhance the generalizability of the results, including participants from various degree levels and

disciplines. Longitudinal designs could provide insights into how academic self-efficacy and

psychological well-being evolve over a student's college journey. Using other measures with

self-report measures would offer a more comprehensive assessment of these constructs. Possible

confounding variables can be considered and measured, or some variables can be controlled for.

Additionally, conducting studies in controlled laboratory settings would help eliminate potential

biases associated with self-report measures and online administration. These approaches will

contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between academic self-efficacy,

psychological well-being, the year of degree, and other influential factors among university

students.