Image: journals.plos.org · rights & removal

Gender as a moderator of the association between academic self-efficacy and academic performance among nursing students in Saudi Arabia

Reporting by PLOS ONERead the original at journals.plos.org

Executive Summary

Fourth-year nursing students at the University of Hail demonstrated high academic self-efficacy (M = 5.33) and Very Good academic performance (GPA M = 3.20). Female students achieved significantly higher GPAs than male students, although both genders showed no significant difference in academic self-efficacy. The first cohort achieved a significantly higher GPA than the second cohort, while the second cohort reported a slightly higher mean academic self-efficacy, though this difference was not statistically significant. A weak but statistically significant positive association existed between academic self-efficacy and cumulative GPA (r = .103, p = .030). Gender did not significantly moderate this relationship, indicating that the link between self-efficacy and performance was similar for male and female students.

Facts Only

* 441 fourth-year nursing students were included in the analysis.
* Female students comprised 54.4% of the sample; male students comprised 45.6%.
* The mean GPA was 3.20 (SD = 0.38), corresponding to Very Good academic performance.
* Female students had significantly higher GPA than male students, t(439) = −2.818, p = .005.
* Academic self-efficacy did not differ significantly by gender, t(439) = 1.200, p = .231.
* The first cohort had significantly higher GPA than the second cohort, t(439) = 6.310, p < .001.
* Academic self-efficacy had a weak positive association with GPA, r(439) =.103, p = .030.
* Gender did not significantly moderate the self-efficacy-GPA association (delta R-squared = .004, p = .201).

Full Take

The finding that academic self-efficacy is weakly associated with GPA, and this relationship does not significantly change based on gender, suggests that while confidence in learning is present, it is an insufficient predictor of overall cumulative success, especially when considering prior achievement. The lack of gender moderation implies that the mechanisms linking self-efficacy to performance are equally active for both groups within this specific context. This observation challenges broader educational literature where gender often moderates belief systems; here, shared exposure to the same curriculum and assessment structures appears to equalize the impact of efficacy across genders. The cohort difference in GPA points toward potential systemic variations in curriculum implementation or institutional support between the two cohorts, suggesting that contextual factors may overshadow individual self-efficacy variations when examining outcome differences. The implication for nursing education is that strategies must move beyond focusing solely on individual self-efficacy; they require addressing the context of curriculum reform and ensuring equitable experiential pathways to performance. What specific mechanisms within academic advising or institutional support led to the differential GPA between cohorts, and how might these contextual variables interact with the modest efficacy-performance link across different student groups?

From the original · PLOS ONE

Figures Abstract Background Academic performance in nursing education is influenced by multiple psychosocial factors, including academic self-efficacy, defined as students’ confidence in their ability to complete academic learning tasks successfully, which is consistently relevant to student achievement and adaptation.

Read the full story at journals.plos.org

Sentinel — provisional

Raw score, 0 to 1 (uncalibrated)0.10

No strong signs of machine writing were found in the source article. Provisional estimate, not a finding that a person wrote it.

The model's own note (unverified)

This text is highly characteristic of peer-reviewed academic research, exhibiting complex methodological detail and nuanced interpretation that points toward human authorship.

This looks only at the wording of the original source article, not at this page's AI-written sections. A small local AI model made this estimate. It has not been checked against known human and machine texts, so treat it as provisional. It cannot show who wrote an article.

What the model noticed in the source article

Sentence length variance is erratic; transitions are varied and complex; sophisticated academic vocabulary used consistently.

Demonstrates deep, nuanced discussion weaving together theoretical foundations (Bandura) with specific statistical findings and contextual limitations.

The structure follows a clear research exposition, moving logically from background to methods, results, and complex discussion points without obvious boilerplate repetition.

Citations are specific and relevant, and the interpretation of statistical caveats (e.g., cross-sectional association vs. prediction) is sophisticated and contextually grounded.

Signs the model read as against machine writing

The nuanced discussion regarding limitations, confounding variables (like academic advising or burnout), and the cautious interpretation of weak correlation results strongly suggests human analytical synthesis rather than pure LLM output.

The integration of specific statistical details with theoretical implications demonstrates a depth typical of human academic writing.