Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The present study investigated the interplay between Basic Psychological Needs (BPNs)—autonomy, competence, and relatedness—and task engagement in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learning at the university level in China. Adopting a mixed-methods approach, the research combined quantitative data from 3,807 participants with qualitative insights from group interviews to explore how BPN satisfaction influenced students’ engagement across behavioral, emotional, cognitive, agentic, and social dimensions. The quantitative findings, analyzed through Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), revealed that autonomy was the most significant predictor of task engagement across all dimensions, with competence and relatedness also showed strong predictive effects, though competence did not significantly affect social engagement. The qualitative analysis identified three primary themes: instruction, stratification, and motivation, emphasizing the need for balanced autonomy support, differentiated instruction, and interactive activities to foster engagement. Notably, the study highlighted the “autonomy paradox” in transitional educational contexts, where students craved autonomy yet experienced stress in its absence of structured guidance. The findings offer both theoretical contributions to Self-Determination Theory (SDT) by highlighting cultural nuances in autonomy’s predictive power and practical implications for EFL pedagogy, urging educators to create environments that balance autonomy with structured support, promote competence development, and strengthen teacher-student and peer relationships. Despite limitations, such as the reliance on a single university sample, the study lays the foundation for further research into BPNs and task engagement in diverse educational settings.

Plain Language Summary

How Students’ Basic Psychological Needs Affect Their Engagement in English Learning: A Study at a Chinese University

This study looked at how Chinese university students’ psychological needs influence their engagement in learning English. Specifically, it focused on three needs: autonomy (having control over their learning), competence (feeling capable), and relatedness (feeling connected to teachers and classmates). We surveyed 3,807 students and conducted interviews with 10 students to understand both overall trends and individual experiences. The results showed that students who felt more autonomous, competent, and connected were more actively involved in class, thought carefully about tasks, shared their ideas, and interacted with peers. Autonomy was the strongest predictor of engagement, but students sometimes felt stressed when given too much independence, revealing an “autonomy paradox.” Competence, while important, did not significantly influence social engagement, suggesting that feeling capable alone may not encourage classroom interaction. The findings suggest that English teachers can help students engage more by offering clear guidance, supporting skill development, and fostering positive relationships in the classroom. Meeting students’ psychological needs is key to boosting motivation, participation, and success in English learning.

Keywords

basic psychological needs task engagement EFL learning autonomy paradox

Introduction

In the realm of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) education, particularly within university contexts, the level of student engagement plays a critical role in influencing language learning outcomes. Engagement in learning is a multidimensional construct, encompassing behavioral, cognitive, emotional, agentic, and social dimensions, which all contribute to students’ overall academic involvement. Theories rooted in self-determination theory (SDT) have increasingly been used to explore how students’ basic psychological needs (BPNs)—autonomy, competence, and relatedness—affect their engagement in learning activities. Meeting these psychological needs is theorized to foster intrinsic motivation, leading to deeper, more sustained engagement in educational tasks.

However, despite the growing body of research on SDT in EFL contexts, several gaps remain in understanding the specific dynamics between BPN satisfaction and task engagement. While numerous studies have confirmed the role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness in motivating students in various educational settings, research focusing on how these needs interact in the context of Chinese university EFL learners remains relatively sparse. Particularly, little is known about how these factors affect different dimensions of engagement in Chinese EFL classrooms, which are often characterized by a traditional teacher-centered approach.

The current study sought to address these gaps by examining the relationship between BPN satisfaction and task engagement in the EFL context at a Chinese university. Through a mixed-methods design, it explored both quantitative and qualitative data to understand how BPN satisfaction influenced the five dimensions of task engagement—behavioral, cognitive, emotional, agentic, and social—among university students. In doing so, the present study not only contributes to the theoretical understanding of SDT but also offers practical insights into how EFL instruction can be designed to better meet students’ psychological needs and, consequently, enhance their engagement and language learning outcomes.

The findings have important implications for both EFL pedagogy and future research. By considering the unique cultural and educational context of Chinese universities, the present study provides a more nuanced understanding of how BPN satisfaction influences task engagement and offers recommendations for pedagogical practices that support students’ psychological needs in EFL learning environments.

Literature Review

Basic Psychological Needs

SDT offers a distinct framework in motivation research, encompassing a continuum of motivation types ranging from intrinsic motivation to amotivation, each influencing behavioral quality and psychological outcomes in different ways (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Central to SDT is the premise that intrinsic motivation and the process of internalization are fundamentally grounded in the fulfillment of specific psychological needs (Ryan, 2017). The theory posits that humans inherently possess a drive for psychological growth, manifesting through natural tendencies for learning, mastery, and meaningful social connections (Ryan & Deci, 2020). However, these human capacities are not automatic; they require supportive environmental conditions to be fully realized (Elahi Shirvan & Alamer, 2024). Consequently, SDT primarily explores how socio-contextual factors either foster or hinder optimal functioning through the satisfaction of three BPNs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

Among the three BPNs, autonomy is the most central, conceptualized as the psychological state in which individuals experience volitional functioning, personal congruence, and integrated self-regulation (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Autonomy is satisfied when individuals perceive their actions as self-endorsed and aligned with their authentic values and interests (Ryan, 2017). This need encompasses three core dimensions: self-governance, the exercise of volitional choice, and the experience of psychological ownership over one’s actions (Liebenberg et al., 2022; Ryan & Deci, 2020). Empirical research consistently supports the importance of autonomy in educational contexts, with Martinek et al. (2020) finding that autonomy support is strongly associated with improved autonomous learning regulation. In a similar vein, Dincer et al. (2012) demonstrated that autonomy-supportive environments predict various positive educational outcomes, including enhanced English proficiency, higher classroom engagement, and better academic achievement.

Competence is another core BPN, conceptualized as the need to experience mastery and effectiveness in one’s actions (Ryan & Deci, 2002). This need involves two interrelated dimensions: the perception of one’s ability to function successfully in relevant domains (Ryan & Deci, 2020) and the intrinsic drive to actively engage with learning environments to develop skills and capabilities (Liu et al., 2024). Research shows that optimal satisfaction of competence requires three key conditions: appropriately challenging tasks, constructive feedback, and regular opportunities for skill development (Ryan, 2017). When students feel competent, they are more likely to engage in deeper learning and exhibit higher academic performance (Akbari et al., 2015). Particularly noteworthy is the study by Fang et al. (2019), which identified competence need satisfaction as a significant predictor of learner engagement in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), highlighting its critical role in digital learning contexts.

Relatedness, the third BPN, encompasses the fundamental need for meaningful social connections, marked by mutual care, emotional warmth, and secure interpersonal bonds (Reis et al., 2000; Vansteenkiste et al., 2020). This need is optimally fulfilled through reciprocal social interactions in which individuals feel valued by others and can contribute meaningfully to their social groups (Conesa et al., 2022). The experience of relatedness is shaped by two processes: establishing close interpersonal connections and cultivating a sense of significance within one’s social networks, often through prosocial behaviors like group collaboration and benevolent actions (Ryan & Deci, 2002). In educational settings, relatedness plays a particularly important role, influencing students’ perceptions of teacher care, respect, and appreciation. Empirical evidence shows that students who perceive strong relational support from teachers demonstrate greater self-regulation and persistence when tackling challenging academic tasks (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009).

The tripartite nature of these BPNs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness) forms a robust foundation for psychological vitality. When all three needs are satisfied, individuals experience enhanced motivation and well-being; conversely, frustration of any single need can significantly diminish motivational processes (Ryan & Deci, 2020). The interplay between supportive and neglectful environmental conditions is crucial, as it directly impacts individuals’ potential to engage optimally with learning tasks. The theoretical framework highlights the importance of understanding how contextual factors, particularly in educational settings, can be leveraged to foster the satisfaction of BPNs, thereby enhancing students’ motivation and engagement in EFL learning contexts.

Task Engagement

Task engagement has become a central focus in educational research due to its strong positive correlations with essential learning outcomes such as motivation, persistence, satisfaction, and academic achievement (Egbert et al., 2021; Y. Wang et al., 2025). Oga-Baldwin (2019) highlights that engagement is “perhaps one of the most crucial steps in predicting how students succeed at languages in formal education settings” (p. 4). Task engagement is operationalized as the extent of students’ active participation in classroom activities, serving as a key indicator of learners’ investment in the learning process (Zare & Derakhshan, 2025). In EFL contexts, engagement specifically manifests through the intensity of students’ cognitive and behavioral involvement in language learning (Shakki, 2022). Extensive empirical evidence underscores that higher levels of engagement consistently predict superior learning outcomes (Lawson & Lawson, 2013).

The theoretical conceptualization of task engagement has evolved, building on the seminal tripartite model by Fredricks et al. (2004), which identified three core dimensions: behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement. Behavioral engagement refers to observable participation and involvement in academic tasks, including attention, effort, and persistence (Fredricks et al., 2004; M. T. Wang & Fredricks, 2014). It is closely tied to the degree to which students engage with learning activities, demonstrating their attentiveness and dedication to the task (Y. Wang et al., 2025). Cognitive engagement emerges when learners apply higher-order cognitive skills, such as critical thinking, conceptual exploration, and the integration of knowledge across disciplines (Mitchell & Carbone, 2011). Research indicates that students who exhibit high levels of cognitive engagement develop superior cognitive flexibility and advanced problem-solving abilities (Jelas et al., 2016). Emotional engagement reflects the affective connection students develop with their educational environment (Shakki, 2022; van Uden et al., 2013). It encompasses students’ emotional responses during task participation, with positive emotional engagement being particularly important for fostering school connectedness and overall motivation (Dao, 2021; Lawson & Lawson, 2013).

More recently, the task engagement framework has been expanded to include agentic engagement as a fourth dimension (Reeve & Tseng, 2011). Agentic engagement refers to students’ proactive involvement in their learning process, characterized by activities like asking questions, expressing preferences, and communicating learning needs (Reeve, 2013; Reeve & Lee, 2014). This dimension emphasizes learners’ agency in shaping their educational experience, actively contributing to the instructional environment. Building on this framework, Egbert et al. (2021) proposed a comprehensive five-dimensional model of engagement, which incorporates behavioral, emotional, cognitive, agentic, and social engagement. Social engagement, which involves reciprocal interactions between learners (Dao, 2021), has been increasingly recognized as a crucial predictor of language learning success, particularly in instructed language learning environments. Philp and Duchesne (2016) highlight social engagement as an essential component in EFL settings, with empirical research supporting its positive impact on learning outcomes (Philp & Duchesne, 2016).

This evolving conceptualization of task engagement underscores the complexity of student involvement in learning, recognizing that engagement extends beyond mere participation to include cognitive, emotional, and social dimensions that are critical for fostering deeper, more meaningful learning experiences.

BPNs and Task Engagement in EFL Learning

Grounded in SDT, a growing body of empirical research consistently demonstrates that students’ engagement in EFL learning is significantly influenced by the extent to which their BPNs are satisfied within educational environments (Reeve, 2012; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Specifically, the effectiveness of pedagogical practices in addressing students’ BPNs plays a pivotal role in shaping their levels of engagement in EFL contexts (Shakki, 2022). Satisfaction of autonomy, competence, and relatedness needs, in particular, has been found to be crucial in fostering student participation, motivation, and persistence in language learning.

The relationship between competence need satisfaction and student engagement has been widely explored across diverse educational settings. Research suggests that perceived competence is a strong predictor of both behavioral and emotional engagement, particularly during early schooling years (Fredricks et al., 2004). A notable study by Dincer et al. (2012) with Turkish EFL preparatory students revealed that learners who perceived themselves as more competent in speaking English demonstrated increased voluntary participation in classroom activities. This engagement was further associated with higher academic performance, illustrating the vital role of competence satisfaction in promoting EFL learning outcomes. Similarly, Thaliah and Hashim (2008) found that autonomy-supportive teaching practices in Malaysian schools accounted for approximately 30% of the variance in classroom engagement, particularly impacting the behavioral and cognitive engagement dimensions.

Further studies have supported the critical role of autonomy in fostering engagement. For instance, Coterón et al. (2024) confirmed that autonomy-supportive conditions significantly enhanced students’ behavioral engagement in EFL classrooms. In line with these findings, Zhou et al. (2022) highlighted the role of BPN satisfaction in synchronous online English courses, illustrating its positive impact on task engagement. Recent advances in research methodologies have deepened our understanding of these relationships, particularly through SEM. Dincer et al. (2019) demonstrated that teacher autonomy-support was a key predictor of BPN satisfaction, which, in turn, facilitated engagement across all four dimensions—behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and agentic. The finding highlights the importance of autonomy-supportive teaching strategies in fostering student engagement.

The role of relatedness in EFL engagement has also gained increasing attention. Liu et al. (2024) and Zhou et al. (2022) independently confirmed the significant impact of relatedness satisfaction on academic engagement, with classroom connectedness emerging as a critical predictor of students’ overall engagement. This trend is particularly evident in the Asian EFL context, where a strong sense of connection to teachers and peers enhances learners’ behavioral participation, cognitive investment, and emotional attachment to the language learning process (Hoi, 2025; X. Wang & Wang, 2024).

These findings underscore the complex interplay between BPN satisfaction and the various dimensions of engagement in EFL learning contexts. The satisfaction of autonomy, competence, and relatedness needs is consistently linked to increased academic achievement and improved learning outcomes (Zhou et al., 2022). However, the current body of literature reveals some inconsistencies in understanding the exact nature of the BPNs-engagement relationship. Much of the existing research treats BPNs and task engagement as monolithic constructs, without exploring the nuanced interrelationships between their respective sub-dimensions. Addressing this gap is especially important in the context of Chinese university EFL learners, where cultural and contextual factors may influence the dynamics of BPN satisfaction and task engagement.

Moreover, there is a noticeable gap in the literature concerning the social and agentic dimensions of engagement, despite their growing empirical significance in language learning outcomes. While emotional, cognitive, and behavioral engagement have been extensively studied, agentic and social engagement dimensions remain underexplored, particularly within EFL contexts.

To address the identified gaps and further advance pedagogical practices, the current study builds on the theoretical frameworks of BPN satisfaction and the five-dimensional task engagement model. The following research questions guide our investigation:

Research Question 1: What specific relationships exist between Chinese university EFL students’ satisfaction of basic psychological needs and their multidimensional task engagement?

Research Question 2: How are Chinese university EFL students’ basic psychological needs currently being supported and addressed in instructional contexts?

Drawing on Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000) and previous studies on learner engagement (e.g., Dincer et al., 2019; Reeve, 2012), the present study hypothesizes that the satisfaction of each basic psychological need will positively predict multiple dimensions of task engagement. Specifically, we propose:

H1: Autonomy positively predicts Chinese university EFL students’ (a) behavioral, (b) emotional, (c) cognitive, (d) agentic, and (e) social engagement.

H2: Competence positively predicts Chinese university EFL students’ (a) behavioral, (b) emotional, (c) cognitive, (d) agentic, and (e) social engagement.

H3: Relatedness positively predicts Chinese university EFL students’ (a) behavioral, (b) emotional, (c) cognitive, (d) agentic, and (e) social engagement.

Methodology

A mixed-methods design was employed to comprehensively address the research questions. The quantitative component allows for the examination of relationships between basic psychological needs and multidimensional task engagement across a large sample, while the qualitative component provides in-depth insights into students’ experiences, helping to contextualize and interpret the quantitative findings.

Participants

The study employed a convenience sampling approach (Etikan et al., 2016) to recruit participants from a comprehensive university in China. As detailed in Table 1, the quantitative sample comprised 3,807 Chinese EFL learners, representing a diverse demographic profile. The quantitative sample size was determined to ensure sufficient statistical power for SEM (Kline, 2023), allowing stable estimation of model parameters and reliable evaluation of model fit. The participant distribution included 2,150 female students (56.5%) and 1,657 male students (43.5%), with 66.3% being freshmen and 33.7% sophomores. Regarding academic disciplines, 43.7% of participants were enrolled in liberal arts programs, while 56.3% pursued science-related majors. All participants had completed approximately 9 years of formal English education at primary and secondary levels prior to university enrollment.

Table 1.

Backgrounds of Questionnaire Participants.

Variable	N (%)
Gender
Male	1,657 (43.5)
Female	2,150 (56.5)
Major
Liberal arts	1,664 (43.7)
Sciences	2,143 (56.3)
Grade
Freshman	2,524 (66.3)
Sophomore	1,283 (33.7)

For the qualitative phase of the research, a purposive subsample of 10 participants (6 sophomores and 4 freshmen) was selected from the initial pool of 3,807 respondents based on their voluntary participation in semi-structured group interviews (shown in Table 2). This stratified selection ensured representation across academic years while maintaining the study’s methodological rigor.

Table 2.

Backgrounds of Interview Participants.

Participant	Gender	Grade	Major (category)
P1	Male	Freshman	Sciences
P2	Female	Sophomore	Sciences
P3	Female	Sophomore	Liberal arts
P4	Male	Freshman	Liberal arts
P5	Female	Freshman	Sciences
P6	Female	Sophomore	Sciences
P7	Male	Sophomore	Liberal arts
P8	Female	Sophomore	Sciences
P9	Male	Freshman	Liberal arts
P10	Male	Freshman	Liberal arts

Data Collection

The present study employed a mixed-methods approach to achieve a comprehensive understanding (Venkatesh et al., 2013). The research instrument consisted of three sections: demographic information, the Basic Psychological Needs in Second Language (BPNs-L2) scale, and the Task Engagement Questionnaire (TEQ).

The BPNs-L2 scale, originally developed and validated by Elahi Shirvan and Alamer (2024), was adapted to measure participants’ satisfaction of three BPNs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Each construct was operationalized through four items, with the scale’s psychometric properties having been rigorously established through bifactor Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM) techniques (Alamer, 2022). Participants responded using a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Representative items included: “I am able to freely decide my own pace of learning in English” (autonomy), “I can be a successful language learner” (competence), and “My English teacher is friendly and approachable with me” (relatedness).

Task engagement was assessed using an adapted version of the task engagement questionnaire (TEQ) developed by Zare and Derakhshan (2025), measuring five distinct dimensions: behavioral, emotional, cognitive, agentic, and social engagement. The instrument employed a `five-point frequency scale (1 = never to 5 = always), with sample items including: “I worked as hard as I could to complete the task.”“I felt interested when doing the task.”“During the task, I tried to summarize it in my own words.”“During the task, I expressed my preferences and opinions.”“It was important for me to communicate with the teacher while doing the tasks.”

All constructs were measured using a five-point Likert scale, consistent with prior validated instruments in the field (Elahi Shirvan & Alamer, 2024; Zare & Derakhshan, 2025). This scale was selected to balance precision in measurement with participant ease of response. While a five-point scale may slightly limit variance relative to longer scales, inspection of descriptive statistics and subsequent SEM analyses confirmed that the scale adequately captured meaningful differences in BPN satisfaction and task engagement.

The final research instrument included 31 items and was administered via Wenjuanxing (www.wjx.cn), a widely recognized and reliable Chinese online survey platform commonly used for academic data collection. All instruments used in this research, including the BPNs-L2 scale and the Task Engagement Questionnaire, are clearly cited to their original sources. The full questionnaire is available in Appendix 1. Before completing the survey, participants were provided with comprehensive information about the study’s purpose, highlighting the voluntary and confidential nature of their participation. To ensure clarity and ease of understanding, the instrument was presented in Mandarin, resulting in complete responses from 3,807 Chinese EFL learners.

To complement the quantitative findings, semi-structured group interviews were conducted. A purposive sampling approach was used to select 10 participants, resulting in 2 separate group interviews, each with 5 participants. These interviews were conducted face-to-face in a quiet and private meeting room on the university campus. Each session lasted approximately 60 to 75 min. Interview questions can be found in Appendix 2. The interview protocol, developed through an iterative process informed by the survey results and refined through multiple revisions following pilot interviews with two students, incorporated a tripartite focus: (1) identification of EFL learning needs, (2) exploration of learning challenges, and (3) collection of pedagogical improvement suggestions. These carefully designed interview sessions enabled comprehensive investigation of participants’ perceptions concerning psychological need fulfillment in EFL learning environments. To ensure optimal communication and authentic expression, all interviews were conducted in Mandarin, with explicit participant consent obtained for audio recording. The recorded data subsequently underwent verbatim transcription and rigorous thematic analysis in accordance with established qualitative research methodologies (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Creswell & Poth, 2018).

Data Analysis

The quantitative data analysis employed a comprehensive approach using IBM SPSS Statistics 27 and AMOS 24 software packages. Initially, descriptive statistical analyses were conducted to examine central tendency and distribution characteristics, including calculations of means, standard deviations, skewness, and kurtosis indices. These preliminary analyses served dual purposes: characterizing the sample profile and assessing data distribution normality, which is a fundamental assumption for subsequent parametric analyses.

Subsequent analytical procedures involved bivariate correlation analysis to explore potential associations among key study variables. The primary analytical framework utilized SEM through AMOS 24 to examine both direct and indirect relationships between the three dimensions of BPNs and the five dimensions of task engagement. This sophisticated analytical approach enabled the investigation of complex structural relationships among the study’s theoretical constructs.

Prior to main data collection, rigorous psychometric testing was conducted to establish the measurement instruments’ reliability and validity. Internal consistency reliability was assessed through multiple indices: Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, composite reliability (CR), and factor loadings. The overall scale demonstrated excellent reliability (α = .980), substantially exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.8 (Viladrich et al., 2017). As presented in Table 3, all CR values surpassed 0.7, indicating strong internal consistency across constructs. Furthermore, all measurement items exhibited factor loadings exceeding 0.50, confirming adequate individual item reliability. Convergent validity was established through average variance extracted (AVE) values, all of which exceeded the benchmark of 0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), thereby substantiating the measurement model’s robustness.

Table 3.

Factor Loadings, AVE and CR.

Constructs	Indicators	Factor loadings	AVE	CR
Autonomy	Au1	0.872	0.562	.833
	Au2	0.869
	Au3	0.595
	Au4	0.616
Competence	Co1	0.899	0.786	.917
	Co2	0.929
	Co3	0.829
Relatedness	Re1	0.819	0.745	.921
	Re2	0.919
	Re3	0.805
	Re4	0.904
Behavioral engagement	BE1	0.833	0.724	.913
	BE2	0.904
	BE3	0.822
	BE4	0.841
Emotional engagement	EE1	0.908	0.909	.976
	EE2	0.957
	EE3	0.976
	EE4	0.971
Cognitive engagement	CE1	0.886	0.854	.967
	CE2	0.927
	CE3	0.93
	CE4	0.947
	CE5	0.929
Agentic engagement	AE1	0.95	0.882	.957
	AE2	0.941
	AE3	0.926
Social engagement	SE1	0.847	0.786	.936
	SE2	0.914
	SE3	0.882
	SE4	0.902

The qualitative data analysis followed the six-phase thematic analysis framework outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006), utilizing NVivo 20 software to facilitate the process. This approach was selected for its flexibility and theoretical freedom in identifying, analyzing, and reporting themes within the data. The analytical procedure involved the following stages: (1) familiarizing with the data through repeated reading of the verbatim transcribed interview recordings; (2) generating initial codes across the entire dataset; (3) searching for themes by collating relevant codes; (4) reviewing potential themes in relation to the coded extracts and the entire dataset; (5) defining and naming themes to capture their essence; and (6) producing the report with compelling narrative and vivid examples. The coding process commenced with initial descriptive coding, followed by categorization according to the three BPNs domains. Table 4 demonstrates the process of abstracting raw data into sub-themes and core themes. Thematic saturation was considered achieved when no new codes, categories, or themes emerged from the interview data during the iterative coding process. This determination was guided by repeated reading and discussion among the research team, ensuring that all relevant aspects of participants’ experiences regarding BPN satisfaction and task engagement were comprehensively captured. This approach follows established qualitative research guidelines for saturation (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Creswell & Poth, 2018).

Table 4.

Examples of the Abstraction Process.

Core theme	Sub-theme	Illustrative quote
1. Instruction: Fostering Competence and Social Engagement	Need for structured guidance	“We actually have a lot of free time, but I often don’t know how to use it effectively…I would feel more directed and find it easier to persist.”
1. Instruction: Fostering Competence and Social Engagement	Desire for interactive teaching	“I enjoy group collaboration tasks…It not only practices our speaking but also allows more interaction with classmates, making me feel less isolated in learning.”
2. Stratification: Enhancing Autonomy and Cognitive Engagement	Challenge of proficiency disparity	“In our class…if the teacher always teaches the same content, it’s either too easy or too difficult for me.”
	Pursuit of personalized pathways	“We need differentiated instruction that addresses our varying goals - whether it’s passing CET-4/6, professional development, or preparing for overseas study.”
3. Motivation: Driving Behavioral and Emotional Engagement	Tedium of traditional lectures	“If the class is just the teacher talking and us listening, it’s easy to lose focus…That’s when class feels truly interesting.”
3. Motivation: Driving Behavioral and Emotional Engagement	Sense of responsibility in collaborative learning	“For a group presentation, I spent extra time rehearsing…because I didn’t want to let my teammates down. We were in it together.”

To ensure analytical rigor, the coding process incorporated multiple verification strategies. The coding task was collectively performed by three researchers: they first conducted independent preliminary coding and theme identification of the transcribed texts, followed by multiple rounds of discussion and comparison of each other’s coding results to reach a consensus on the core themes. Data saturation was considered achieved when the team unanimously agreed that subsequent interview data no longer generated new themes but only served to supplement and confirm the existing ones. This iterative process involved meticulous examination of coding alignment with raw data and extensive team discussions to mitigate individual bias and enhance interpretive validity. The qualitative findings addressed the study’s second research question, with analytical conclusions substantiated through anonymized participant quotations in the results presentation.

Ethics Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the authors’ affiliated university in China. Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Research Ethics Committee prior to data collection. All participants were fully informed about the purpose and procedures of the study, their right to withdraw at any time without penalty, and the confidentiality of their responses. Written informed consent was obtained from all student participants before the administration of the questionnaire and the group interviews. Participation was entirely voluntary, and all data were anonymized to ensure participant privacy and data confidentiality.

Results

Results of Quantitative Analysis

Descriptive Statistics and Data Distribution

Table 5 presents the comprehensive descriptive statistics for all study variables. The analysis revealed that participants reported moderate levels of perceived competence (M = 2.4568, range: 1–5), while demonstrating relatively lower satisfaction levels across other psychological need dimensions. These findings suggested that students generally perceived their BPNs as inadequately met within EFL learning contexts. Furthermore, participants characterized their engagement patterns as predominantly passive across all dimensions: behavioral, cognitive, emotional, agentic, and social. The distribution characteristics, as indicated by skewness and kurtosis values within the acceptable range of ±2 (Noar, 2003), confirmed the data’s suitability for subsequent parametric analyses.

Table 5.

Descriptive Statistics of the Variables (n = 3,807).

Constructs	M	SD	Skewness	Kurtosis
Autonomy	2.2504	0.75315	0.503	0.802
Competence	2.4568	0.91247	0.402	0.106
Relatedness	1.7474	0.70685	0.996	1.638
BE	1.9626	0.74411	0.831	1.447
EE	2.2447	0.98696	0.699	0.155
CE	2.1735	0.87744	0.746	0.828
AE	2.2362	0.91426	0.606	0.303
SE	2.1124	0.80917	0.662	0.908

Bivariate Correlation Analysis

Table 6 displays the Pearson correlation coefficients and corresponding effect sizes among study variables. The analysis demonstrated statistically significant positive correlations (p < .01) among all measured constructs, including the three basic psychological needs (autonomy, competence, relatedness) and the five engagement dimensions (behavioral, cognitive, emotional, agentic, social). Based on the effect size classification by Plonsky and Oswald (2014), both competence and autonomy demonstrated large effect sizes on overall task engagement. In contrast, relatedness exhibited differential effects: large effect sizes on behavioral and social engagement, and moderate effect sizes on emotional, cognitive, and agentic engagement.

Table 6.

Correlations Between Variables (n = 3,807).

Variable	Competence	Autonomy	Relatedness	BE	EE	CE	AE
Competence	—
Autonomy	0.752**	—
Relatedness	0.478**	0.608**	—
BE	0.661**	0.672**	0.698**	—
EE	0.782**	0.682**	0.556**	0.762**	—
CE	0.750**	0.700**	0.562**	0.749**	0.840**	—
AE	0.718**	0.695**	0.578**	0.727**	0.793**	0.860**	—
SE	0.666**	0.679**	0.632**	0.743**	0.751**	0.813**	0.873**

p < .01.

Structural Equation Modeling Results

The SEM analysis, presented in Table 7 and Figure 1, revealed significant path coefficients between psychological needs and engagement dimensions. All hypotheses were supported, with the exception of H2(e).

Table 7.

SEM Path Analysis Results.

Pathway	β	S.E.	T-value	p
H1a: BE—Autonomy	.548	0.02	28.436	***
H1b: EE—Autonomy	.677	0.029	32.976	***
H1c: CE—Autonomy	.868	0.034	35.529	***
H1d: AE—Autonomy	.923	0.038	37.978	***
H1e: SE—Autonomy	.883	0.032	35.006	***
H2a: BE—Competence	.24	0.009	17.763	***
H2b: EE—Competence	.438	0.012	32.632	***
H2c: CE—Competence	.236	0.01	20.25	***
H2d:AE—Competence	.096	0.011	8.836	***
H2e: SE—Competence	.008	0.009	0.684	.494
H3a: BE—Relatedness	.547	0.011	36.21	***
H3b: EE—Relatedness	.151	0.012	12.583	***
H3c: CE—Relatedness	.103	0.011	9.254	***
H3d: AE—Relatedness	.123	0.012	11.38	***
H3e: SE—Relatedness	.244	0.011	20.665	***

***

p < .001.

Figure 1.

Proposed model with results.

Specifically, autonomy emerged as the most consistent and potent predictor, demonstrating significant positive effects across all five engagement dimensions. Competence also significantly predicted behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and agentic engagement; however, its path to social engagement was non-significant (β = .008, p = .494). Relatedness was a significant predictor for all dimensions of engagement, with its strongest influence observed on behavioral engagement. The complete structural model is visually represented in Figure 1.

Results of Qualitative Analysis

The qualitative analysis revealed diverse perspectives regarding participants’ perceptions of the satisfaction of their BPNs and task engagement in EFL learning contexts. Three predominant themes emerged from the group interviews: instruction, stratification, and motivation.

Instruction: Fostering Competence and Social Engagement

The first prominent theme centered on instructional practices and their impact on competence development and social engagement. While participants acknowledged sufficient autonomy in managing their extracurricular EFL learning time, they expressed a strong need for more structured guidance in optimizing this autonomy. Participant 1′s observation highlighted a common challenge: “Many freshmen struggle with time management, often prioritizing entertainment over productive English learning without proper guidance.” This point was further elaborated by participant 10 who noted, “We actually have a lot of free time, but I often don’t know how to use it effectively. If we had a more specific study plan or a weekly task list, I would feel more directed and find it easier to persist.” This sentiment was echoed by Participant 9, who described their teacher’s systematic approach:

Our English teacher implements a structured weekly routine through the Word Master app, assigning vocabulary and listening exercises. While this system benefits many of us, some classmates still struggle with consistent completion, suggesting the need for more rigorous monitoring and sustained implementation.

These accounts underscore the importance of consistent, well-structured instructional support in enhancing both competence development and social engagement through teacher-student interactions. Participant 2 highlighted the value of interactive formats in fostering this connection:

I enjoy it when the teacher assigns tasks for group collaboration, like creating an English drama together. It not only practices our speaking but also allows more interaction with classmates, making me feel less isolated in learning.

Stratification: Enhancing Autonomy and Cognitive Engagement

The second theme emphasized the necessity of stratified instruction to address diverse learning needs and promote cognitive engagement. Participants highlighted the challenges of large class sizes (approximately 80 students) and varying proficiency levels within single classes. Participant 7 articulated this concern:

When teachers focus solely on textbook content, many students become disengaged or even skip classes. We need differentiated instruction that addresses our varying goals - whether it’s passing CET-4/6, professional development, or preparing for overseas study.

This call for differentiation was rooted in the classroom reality, as participant 6 explained:

In our class, some students have excellent English, while others lack even the basics. If the teacher always teaches the same content, it’s either too easy or too difficult for me. I hope we can have group-based teaching according to our levels.

This perspective was further reinforced by Participant 3′s self-assessment: “I often feel like an illiterate in English class.” The call for stratified instruction reflects students’ desire for both increased learning autonomy and enhanced self-efficacy, which are crucial for sustained cognitive engagement. As participant 2 suggested, granting choice could be a key motivator:

I wish I had more options, like choosing between writing an essay or giving an oral presentation. I would be more willing to put in the effort because it’s something I chose myself.

Motivation: Driving Behavioral and Emotional Engagement

The final theme centered on motivational elements influencing classroom engagement. Participants consistently described current EFL classes as lacking in interactivity and motivational appeal. Participant 5 suggested: “We need more active participation opportunities rather than passive listening.” This desire for a dynamic classroom was captured well by participant 9’s comment:

If the class is just the teacher talking and us listening, it’s easy to lose focus. I want more interactive segments. That’s when class feels truly interesting.

This view was also supported by Participant 8, who proposed specific interactive formats: “Activities like presentations, drama performances, and debates would make classes more engaging and motivating.” These observations highlighted the critical role of interactive, student-centered activities in fostering both behavioral participation and emotional investment in the learning process. Furthermore, the data revealed that such activities not only spark interest but also translate into concrete effort, as participant 3 revealed:

For a group presentation, I spent extra time rehearsing and looking up words because I didn’t want to let my teammates down. We were in it together.

This account underscores how motivational classroom designs can simultaneously enhance emotional attachment (not wanting to disappoint peers) and drive behavioral engagement (the extra time and effort expended).

The interview data collectively suggested that effective EFL instruction should incorporate: Structured guidance to optimize autonomous learning time; Differentiated instruction addressing diverse proficiency levels and learning goals; Interactive, student-centered activities to enhance motivation. These elements appear crucial for satisfying students’ BPNs and promoting comprehensive engagement across all dimensions.

Discussion

The present study confirms the critical role of BPNs satisfaction in predicting task engagement among university-level EFL students. The findings align with and extend existing literature on SDT by highlighting how the fulfillment of autonomy, competence, and relatedness significantly influences students’ engagement in English as an EFL settings (Reeve, 2012). This research takes a mixed-methods approach, not only quantitatively validating these relationships but also qualitatively exploring how pedagogical strategies contribute to BPN satisfaction, ultimately enhancing student engagement and learning outcomes. By focusing on the experiences of Chinese university students, the study offers valuable insights into the specific dynamics of BPNs within this cultural and educational context.

Autonomy: The Paramount Predictor of Engagement

The structural equation modeling results revealed that autonomy emerged as the strongest predictor across all dimensions of task engagement. The qualitative data reinforced this finding. For instance, Participant 2 explicitly expressed a desire for autonomous task selection “I wish I had more options, like choosing between writing an essay or giving an oral presentation,” which directly confirms the critical role of autonomy. The finding is consistent with prior research on autonomy-supportive learning environments (Dincer et al., 2019) but offers a novel contribution by demonstrating autonomy’s significant influence on social engagement. The association between autonomy and social engagement, though underexplored in previous literature, suggests that students who perceive greater control and choice in their learning process are more likely to engage with their peers and participate in collaborative activities. This finding is particularly important in the Chinese EFL context, where traditional, teacher-centered pedagogies often limit opportunities for autonomous learning. When students feel a sense of ownership over their learning, they not only engage more in academic tasks but also become more involved in social interactions, fostering a deeper sense of community and collaboration.

Competence: A Multifaceted Engagement Predictor

The relationship between competence satisfaction and task engagement confirmed its positive impact across multiple engagement dimensions, including behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and agentic engagement. These findings are in line with Molinari and Mameli’s (2018) framework and previous studies that have demonstrated the role of competence in promoting academic involvement (Dincer et al., 2012). The study’s results suggest that when students perceive themselves as competent, they are more likely to engage voluntarily in classroom activities and perform better academically. However, an unexpected finding was the lack of a significant relationship between competence satisfaction and social engagement, which contradicts some previous research (e.g., Zhou et al., 2022). This discrepancy could be explained by the cultural context of Chinese students, who, despite feeling competent, might have experienced social inhibition in classroom settings. Factors such as cultural expectations around modesty, a preference for individual work, or limited social skills might have hindered social engagement, even when competence was perceived as high (Chen et al., 2021).

Relatedness: The Social Dimension of Engagement

The strong positive correlation between relatedness and task engagement reinforced existing theoretical frameworks that emphasize the importance of teacher-student rapport and peer interactions in learning environments (Dincer et al., 2019; Y. Wang et al., 2024). The qualitative data further illuminated the role of relatedness in fostering student engagement. The reflection shared by Participant 2 was particularly representative: “group collaboration…allows more interaction with classmates, making me feel less isolated in learning” This sentiment was reinforced by the experiences shared by Participant 5, who underscored the pedagogical value of creating stimulating and interactive learning environments that foster a sense of connectedness. These findings align with recent research emphasizing the critical role of relatedness in driving student engagement (Liu et al., 2024; Zhou et al., 2022). Relatedness not only enhances emotional attachment to the learning process but also facilitates deeper cognitive and behavioral engagement. The importance of fostering positive interpersonal relationships in the classroom, therefore, cannot be overstated, as these connections serve as a catalyst for ongoing academic involvement and persistence.

The Autonomy Paradox in the Chinese Context

The most striking finding of this study is the autonomy paradox, wherein Chinese university EFL students, despite demonstrating a strong preference for autonomy, also expressed discomfort and stress when faced with too much independence in their learning. This paradox is particularly intriguing in light of the study’s finding that autonomy was the most influential predictor of engagement. This result contrasts with earlier research that found competence and relatedness to be equally or more influential (Fang et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2024). In the context of China, where traditional teacher-centered pedagogies are predominant in secondary education, students’ desire for autonomy may be a response to the rigid structures of their earlier academic experiences. However, the qualitative data revealed that this craving for autonomy coexists with feelings of confusion and anxiety when students are expected to make decisions about their learning without sufficient guidance. For example, Participant 1′s existential questioning about learning persistence and Participant 9′s request for more structured homework monitoring illustrate the challenges students face in navigating their newfound autonomy. These findings suggest that while autonomy is essential for engagement, it must be carefully calibrated. Students need autonomy support that balances freedom with appropriate levels of structure and guidance, avoiding the extremes of overcontrol or unregulated independence.

Conclusion

This study provided significant contributions to understanding the relationship between BPNs and task engagement in Chinese university EFL education through a mixed-methods approach. The quantitative analysis revealed that all three BPN dimensions (autonomy, competence, and relatedness) were strong predictors of the five dimensions of task engagement. However, the study also found a notable exception: competence did not significantly influence social engagement. This finding offers novel insights that contribute to the existing literature by highlighting the complexity of the BPN-task engagement relationship, especially within the social domain of EFL learning.

The qualitative analysis further enriched these findings by identifying three key thematic areas that provided actionable strategies for educators to better support students’ BPNs and, consequently, improve their language learning outcomes. These themes emphasize the importance of autonomy-supportive teaching, fostering competence through well-structured feedback and task design, and cultivating strong teacher-student relationships to enhance classroom engagement. The insights from the qualitative data offer practical guidance for EFL pedagogy, particularly in the context of Chinese university students who are navigating a transition from more rigid, teacher-centered education to more independent learning environments at the university level.

The study also makes notable theoretical contributions to the field of second language acquisition. It deepens our understanding of how BPN satisfaction relates to task engagement in EFL settings, addressing gaps in existing research. Two significant theoretical advancements emerge from this study: first, the identification of cultural specificity in autonomy’s role as a predictor of engagement, and second, the emergence of the autonomy paradox in the Chinese educational context. These findings underscore the necessity of developing context-sensitive SDT frameworks that consider the unique educational and cultural dynamics of specific regions, such as China.

From a practical standpoint, the study suggests several key recommendations for EFL instruction. Teachers should aim to implement balanced autonomy support, combining structured guidance with opportunities for student choice to ensure students feel both empowered and supported in their learning. Competence-building activities should be tailored to students’ diverse proficiency levels to foster greater engagement, while relationship-focused teaching strategies should be employed to strengthen classroom connectedness. Furthermore, given the identified autonomy paradox, the study recommends the development of transitional programs to help freshmen adjust to the autonomy expectations at the university level. These programs can guide students through their first experiences with self-directed learning and provide them with the support they need to thrive in more autonomous academic environments.

While this study provides valuable insights into the BPN-task engagement relationship in EFL contexts, several limitations should be acknowledged. The qualitative component relied on group interviews with a relatively small sample, which may have introduced bias and limited the diversity of perspectives. Future research could enhance methodological rigor by incorporating individual interviews or classroom observations to gain a deeper understanding of student experiences. Additionally, the study’s focus on a single Chinese university restricts the generalizability of its findings. The participating university represents only one type of Chinese higher education setting, and variations in regional, institutional, and pedagogical practices may lead to different patterns of BPN satisfaction and task engagement across contexts. Future studies should consider multi-site research to explore regional variations and establish more universal patterns in the BPNs-task engagement relationship across diverse educational contexts.

In conclusion, this study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the factors that influence student engagement in EFL settings and offers practical implications for enhancing pedagogical practices in Chinese universities. The findings highlight the importance of addressing students’ basic psychological needs to promote deeper engagement and more successful language learning outcomes.

Footnotes

The authors gratefully acknowledge the reviewers.

ORCID iDs

Shi Tang

Chenming Lyu

Shaopeng Li

Ethical Considerations

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Ludong University on February 15,2024 (No. 2024-018).

Consent to Participate

All participants provided written informed consent before participating in the study.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by The National Social Science Fund of China (Grant Number: 25BYY115) and The Innovation Project for Graduate Students of Ludong University (Grant Number: IPGS2025-020).

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the first and the corresponding authors.

References

Akbari

Pilot

Robert-Jan Simons

(2015). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in foreign language learning through Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 126–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.036

Alamer

(2022). Exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) and bifactor ESEM for construct validation purposes: Guidelines and applied example. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 100005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100005

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Chen

Dewaele

J.-M.

Zhang

(2021). Sustainable development of EFL/ESL learners’ willingness to communicate: The effects of teachers and teaching styles. Sustainability, 14(1), 10396. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010396

Conesa

P. J.

Onandia-Hinchado

Duñabeitia

J. A.

Moreno

M. Á.

(2022). Basic psychological needs in the classroom: A literature review in elementary and middle school students. Learning and Motivation, 79, 101819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2022.101819

Coterón

Fernández-Caballero

Martín-Hoz

Franco

(2024). The interplay of structuring and controlling teaching styles in physical education and its impact on students’ motivation and engagement. Behavioral Sciences, 14(9), 836. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14090836

Creswell

J. W.

Poth

C. N.

(2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications.

Dao

(2021). Effects of task goal orientation on learner engagement in task performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 59(3), 315–334. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2018-0188

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1104_01

10.

Dincer

Yeşilyurt

Noels

K. A.

Vargas Lascano

D. I.

(2019). Self-determination and classroom engagement of EFL learners: A mixed-methods study of the self-system model of motivational development. Sage Open, 9(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019853913

11.

Dincer

Yesilyurt

Takkac

(2012). The effects of autonomy-supportive climates on EFL learner’s engagement, achievement and competence in English speaking classrooms. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3890–3894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.167

12.

Egbert

J. L.

Shahrokni

S. A.

Abobaker

Bekar

Bantawtook

Roe

M. F.

Zhang

Huh

(2021). Language task engagement: An evidence-based model. TESL-EJ, 24(4), 1–34. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348915833_Language_Task_Engagement_An_Evidence-Based_Model

13.

Elahi Shirvan

Alamer

(2024). Modeling the interplay of EFL learners’ basic psychological needs, grit and L2 achievement. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 45(7), 2831–2847. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2075002

14.

Etikan

Musa

S. A.

Alkassim

R. S.

(2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

15.

Fang

Tang

Yang

Peng

(2019). Social interaction in MOOCs: The mediating effects of immersive experience and psychological needs satisfaction. Telematics and Informatics, 39, 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.01.006

16.

Fornell

Larcker

D. F.

(1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104

17.

Fredricks

J. A.

Blumenfeld

P. C.

Paris

A. H.

(2004). School engagement: potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

18.

Hoi

V. N.

(2025). A synergetic perspective on students’ perception of classroom environment, expectancy value belief, and engagement in an EFL context. Language Teaching Research, 29(3), 1069–1093. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221075781

19.

Jelas

Z. M.

Azman

Zulnaidi

Ahmad

N. A.

(2016). Learning support and academic achievement among Malaysian adolescents: The mediating role of student engagement. Learning Environments Research, 19(2), 221–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-015-9202-5

20.

Kline

R. B.

(Ed.). (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (5th ed.). Guilford Press.

21.

Lawson

M. A.

Lawson

H. A.

(2013). New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research, policy, and practice. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 432–479. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313480891

22.

Liebenberg

J. M.

Scholtz

S. E.

De Beer

L. T.

(2022). The daily basic psychological need satisfaction and work engagement of nurses: A ‘shortitudinal’ diary study. Healthcare, 10(5), 863. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10050863

23.

Liu

Zhang

Zeng

(2024). Exploring the mediating role of basic psychological needs in the relationship between teacher confirmation and students’ academic engagement in EFL classes: A self-determination perspective. Learning and Motivation, 88, 102071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2024.102071

24.

Martinek

Zumbach

Carmignola

(2020). The impact of perceived autonomy support and autonomy orientation on orientations towards teaching and self-regulation at university. International Journal of Educational Research, 102, 101574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101574

25.

Mitchell

Carbone

(2011). A typology of task characteristics and their effects on student engagement. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(5-6), 257–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.05.001

26.

Molinari

Mameli

(2018). Basic psychological needs and school engagement: A focus on justice and agency. Social Psychology of Education, 21(1), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-017-9410-1

27.

Niemiec

C. P.

Ryan

R. M.

(2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878509104318

28.

Noar

S. M.

(2003). The role of structural equation modeling in scale development. Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10(4), 622–647. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1004_8

29.

Oga-Baldwin

W. L. Q.

(2019). Acting, thinking, feeling, making, collaborating: The engagement process in foreign language learning. System, 86, 102128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.102128

30.

Philp

Duchesne

(2016). Exploring engagement in tasks in the language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 50–72. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190515000094

31.

Plonsky

Oswald

F. L.

(2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079

32.

Reeve

(2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In Christenson

S. L.

Reschly

A. L.

Wylie

(Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 149–172). Springer.

33.

Reeve

(2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Education & Psychology, 105(3), 579–595. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032690

34.

Reeve

Lee

(2014). Students’ classroom engagement produces longitudinal changes in classroom motivation. Journal of Education & Psychology, 106(2), 527–540. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034934

35.

Reeve

Tseng

C.-M.

(2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002

36.

Reis

H. T.

Sheldon

K. M.

Gable

S. L.

Roscoe

Ryan

R. M.

(2000). Daily well-being: The role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(4), 419–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200266002

37.

Ryan

R. M.

(2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press.

38.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68

39.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3–33). University of Rochester Press.

40.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860

41.

Shakki

(2022). Iranian EFL students’ L2 engagement: The impact of teacher support teacher-student rapport and. Language Related Research, 13(3), 175–198. https://doi.org/10.52547/lrr.13.3.8

42.

Thaliah

Hashim

R. A.

(2008, November 19-21). Teacher’s autonomy support and ESL classroom engagement: The road less traveled [Paper presentation]. In EDU-COM 2008 International Conference: Sustainability in Higher Education: Directions for Change, Perth, WA, Australia. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ceducom/50/

43.

Vansteenkiste

Ryan

R. M.

Soenens

(2020). Basic psychological need theory: Advancements, critical themes, and future directions. Motivation and Emotion, 44(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-019-09818-1

44.

van Uden

J. M.

Ritzen

Pieters

J. M.

(2013). I think I can engage my students. Teachers’ perceptions of student engagement and their beliefs about being a teacher. Teaching and Teacher Education, 32, 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.01.004

45.

Venkatesh

Brown

S. A.

Bala

(2013). Bridging the qualitative–quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems1. MIS Quarterly, 37(1), 21–54. https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2013/37.1.02

46.

Viladrich

Angulo-Brunet

Doval

(2017). A journey around alpha and omega to estimate internal consistency reliability. Anales de psicología, 33(3), 755–782. https://doi.org/10.6018/ANALESPS.33.3.268401

47.

Wang

M. T.

Fredricks

J. A.

(2014). The reciprocal links between school engagement, youth problem behaviors, and school dropout during adolescence. Child Development, 85(2), 722–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12138

48.

Wang

(2024). Exploring Chinese EFL learners’ engagement with large language models: A self-determination theory perspective. Learning and Motivation, 87, 102014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2024.102014

49.

Wang

Luo

Liao

Zhao

(2024). Exploring the effect of teacher autonomy support on Chinese EFL undergraduates' academic English speaking performance through the mediation of basic psychological needs and classroom engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1323713. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1323713

50.

Wang

Zuo

Wang

(2025). Exploring students online learning behavioral engagement in university: Factors, academic performance and their relationship. Behavioral Sciences, 15(1), 78. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15010078

51.

Zare

Derakhshan

(2025). Task engagement in second language acquisition: a questionnaire development and validation study. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 46, 2761–2777. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2024.2306166

52.

Zhou

Zhu

Zhou

(2022). Impact of teenage EFL learners’ psychological needs on learning engagement and behavioral intention in synchronous online English courses. Sustainability, 14(17), 10468. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710468

The Role of Basic Psychological Needs in Task Engagement: A Mixed-Methods Study in Chinese University EFL Contexts

Abstract

Plain Language Summary

Keywords

Introduction

Literature Review

Basic Psychological Needs

Task Engagement

BPNs and Task Engagement in EFL Learning

Methodology

Participants

Data Collection

Data Analysis

Ethics Statement

Results

Results of Quantitative Analysis

Descriptive Statistics and Data Distribution

Bivariate Correlation Analysis

Structural Equation Modeling Results

Results of Qualitative Analysis

Instruction: Fostering Competence and Social Engagement

Stratification: Enhancing Autonomy and Cognitive Engagement

Motivation: Driving Behavioral and Emotional Engagement

Discussion

Autonomy: The Paramount Predictor of Engagement

Competence: A Multifaceted Engagement Predictor

Relatedness: The Social Dimension of Engagement

The Autonomy Paradox in the Chinese Context

Conclusion

Footnotes

ORCID iDs

Ethical Considerations

Consent to Participate

Funding

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Data Availability Statement

References