TABLE 3.
Results of the hypotheses testing.
| Hypotheses | Std. β | t value | Significance CI (2.50–97.5%) | VIF | f2 |
| Direct paths | |||||
| H1: Self-efficacy → learning engagement | 0.172** | 3.316 | (0.070∼0.276) | 1.395 | 0.038 |
| H2: Subjective well-being → learning engagement | 0.553*** | 12.481 | (0.461∼0.634) | 1.395 | 0.388 |
| H3: Perceived control → self-efficacy | 0.298*** | 5.302 | (0.188∼0.410) | 1.144 | 0.113 |
| H4: Perceived control → subjective well-being | 0.381** | 7.680 | (0.056∼0.257) | 1.144 | 0.183 |
| H5: Perceived closeness → self-efficacy | 0.059 | 1.140 | (-0.038∼0.159) | 1.174 | 0.004 |
| H6: Perceived closeness → subjective well-being | 0.156*** | 3.046 | (0.056∼0.257) | 1.174 | 0.030 |
| H7: Peer referents → self-efficacy | 0.363** | 6.822 | (0.257∼0.467) | 1.194 | 0.161 |
| H8: Peer referents → subjective well-being | 0.194** | 3.413 | (0.084∼0.304) | 1.194 | 0.045 |
**p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.