Professional commitment positively moderates the effect of psychological capital on learning engagement¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The interaction term (psychological capital × professional commitment) significantly predicts learning engagement (β = 0.134, t = 5.288, p < 0.001), with simple slopes rising from 0.324 (low commitment) to 0.593 (high commitment). → Wang 2026

Evidence¶

Wang 2026¶

Wang, N. (2026). The impact of artificial intelligence literacy on learning engagement among university students: the mediating role of psychological capital and the moderating role of professional identity. Frontiers in Psychology, 17:1892204. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1892204

q2 · i? · associational · r2

PLS-SEM moderation analysis with an interaction term in the same 1,198-student survey. Simple slopes at ±1 SD of commitment were 0.324 (low), 0.459 (mean), and 0.593 (high), showing the PsyCap effect "becomes progressively stronger as the level of professional commitment increases".

"the path coefficient of the interaction term (PSY × PC) on learning engagement was significant (β = 0.134, t = 5.288, p < 0.001). These findings indicate that professional commitment positively moderates the relationship between psychological capital and learning engagement."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The indirect effect of AI literacy on engagement via psychological capital strengthens as professional commitment rises (moderated mediation) — related
• Professional commitment is essentially uncorrelated with AI literacy and shows no significant bivariate correlation with learning engagement — related