Emotional variability in L2 learning episodes is primarily intraindividual (62–68%), with modest lag-1 inertia (r ≈ .17–.19) and weak long-term trends or weekly cycles¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r1–r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? ICCs showed within-person variation accounts for 62–68% of variance across outcomes, and mean lag-1 autocorrelations of about .17–.19 indicate modest but reliable affective inertia. → Peng Wang 2026 q2 i? GAM and STL analyses found minimal long-term trends (5–20% of variance) and weak, idiosyncratic weekly cycles (10.4–17.6% of variance). → Peng Wang 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Peng Wang 2026¶

Peng Wang, Lesya Ganushchak, Camille Welie, Roel van Steensel. (2026). Emotions Are Not Random: Machine Learning Reveals Predictable Patterns in a 21-Day Second Language Learning Trajectory. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10141-8

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Variance decomposition and lag-1 autocorrelations computed within individuals across the 6,918 EMA episodes (Table 1). The article describes a "moderate inertia" regime where recent history matters but context retains leverage.

"ICCs indicate that within-person variation dominates, accounting for 62–68% across outcomes. Meanwhile, the mean lag-1 autocorrelations (r ≈.17–0.19) show modest but reliable inertia."

Peng Wang 2026 (2)¶

Peng Wang, Lesya Ganushchak, Camille Welie, Roel van Steensel. (2026). Emotions Are Not Random: Machine Learning Reveals Predictable Patterns in a 21-Day Second Language Learning Trajectory. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10141-8

q2 · i? · associational · r1

GAM trend and STL seasonal-trend decomposition of each learner's 21-day series; cyclical components explained 10.4–17.6% of variance and varied idiosyncratically across learners.

"These linear trends accounted for only a small proportion of total variance (5–20%), indicating that short-term fluctuations dominated emotional and cognitive trajectories."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• During the course, curiosity, enjoyment, confusion and anxiety decreased over time, boredom increased, and surprise and frustration remained stationary. — related
• Epistemic emotions showed no significant carry-over (autoregressive) stability from one course session to the next, except boredom after session type was included. — reports the opposite
• Most variance in students' epistemic emotions was situational (within-person) fluctuation, with 18–37% due to between-person variability. — related
• Most variance in students' momentary classroom emotions lies at the within-person level, yet person-aggregated state measures are fairly reliable (ICC(2) from 0.735 to 0.901) — related
• Cohort effects on activity emotions are minimal across fourteen years, with cohort accounting for only 0.2% to 1.2% of variance in mean emotion scores — related
• Both lecture time and independent study time show a seven-day weekly rhythm, with lecture time peaking midweek and approaching zero on weekends — related