The Interrelationships Between Chinese English-as-a-Foreign-Language Teachers’ Immediacy and Clarity with Learners’ Boredom

Abstract

Since boredom significantly contributes to diminished motivation among learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL), there is a need to identify factors that influence boredom. Amidst various elements that can precipitate students’ boredom, educational-related concepts have garnered particular attention, with the learning environment emerging as a chief focal point due to its consequential importance to learners. Specifically, the role of teachers’ clarity and immediacy in manipulating learners’ performance, enthusiasm, and involvement has been widely recognized. Consequently, in this study, we scrutinized the impact of EFL teachers’ immediacy and clarity in mitigating learners’ boredom. To this end, we collected data from 383 Chinese students through the administration of three scales measuring their perceptions of teacher clarity, teacher immediacy, and learners’ boredom. We identified significant associations between teachers’ clarity and immediacy and learners’ boredom. In Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis, both teacher immediacy and clarity were robust predictors of students’ boredom, with about 48% of the variance in students’ boredom accounted for by teachers’ immediacy, and 53% of this variance attributed to teachers’ clarity. We elaborate upon the implications of these findings in our discussion.

Keywords

boredom EFL students positive psychology teacher clarity teacher immediacy

Introduction

It is widely acknowledged that achievement in language education relies on numerous psycho-emotional variables (Benevene et al., 2020). Emotions impact instruction and acquisition procedures; in other words, in acquiring a second or foreign language, learning is influenced by both positive and negative emotions (MacIntyre, 2017; Wang et al., 2021, 2022). Additionally, research to date on the emotions of language learners has shown that students’ boredom is the most significant emotion in the EFL setting (Derakhshan, Kruk, et al., 2021; Zawodniak et al., 2017). Boredom is a destructive emotion related to an internal sense of emptiness and lack of interest, and it results from a student’s perception that an educational environment is unfavorable (Goldberg et al., 2011). Unfortunately, boredom is the most commonly experienced feeling in the EFL environment, and it can negatively affect student success (e.g., Derakhshan, Fathi, et al., 2022; Derakhshan, Kruk, et al., 2022; Dewaele & Li, 2022; Pawlak et al., 2020; Pekrun et al., 2010; Solhi et al., 2024; Wang, 2023 ; Wang et al., 2022). Indeed, boredom can lead to sadness, lack of motivation, and low interest (Kruk & Zawodniak, 2018), negatively impacting EFL learners’ success and academic engagement (Derakhshan, Doliński, et al., 2022; Derakhshan et al., 2021). Thus, teachers seek to reduce learners’ boredom in the classroom environment (Kruk & Zawodniak, 2020). Due to the prevalence of boredom in EFL settings, students may employ various methods to mentally or behaviorally tackle this undesirable emotion (Goetz et al., 2014).

As psychological factors are important in every domain, especially in the educational system (Derakhshan & Yin, 2024; Zawodniak et al., 2021), educators directly or indirectly influence the psychological aspects of students’ academic experiences (Qin, 2021). Teachers devote most of their time to students’ guidance and instruction, and they assume a much more pivotal role in students’ readiness to learn than do other stakeholders (Pishghadam et al., 2021). According to Habash (2010), EFL instruction in EFL is enhanced when educators utilize techniques that encourage student interactions. Indeed, among the many factors present in all language teaching settings, the importance of a welcoming environment has been empirically affirmed (Yang & Yin, 2022). Positive Psychology (PP), a humanistic concept, illuminates the path to cultivating teacher-student connections (Derakhshan, 2022a; Wang et al., 2021; Wang & Kruk, 2024). The way that learners are nurtured in the educational environment impacts their academic success (Wang & Guan, 2020). Xie and Derakhshan (2021) listed some significant interpersonal communication behaviors that foster such nurturance, including care, clarity, trustworthiness, encouragement, immediacy, rapport, affirmation, humor, and commendation.

Within Xie and Derakshan’s (2002) list, teacher clarity is among the most vital interpersonal interactions, and it is related to various methods and techniques teachers use to ensure their students grasp the course materials (Bolkan, 2017). Teachers’ classroom organization, explanations, illustrations, tactics, and evaluations are all tactics for increasing clarity (Zheng, 2021). In EFL settings that heavily rely on interactions, a teacher’s ability to communicate clearly plays a vital role in the enhancement of learners’ cognitive acquisition, achievements, involvement, curiosity, autonomy, and interest (Bolkan, 2017; Derakhshan, 2022b; Xie & Derakhshan, 2021; Zheng, 2021).

Another significant interactive teaching behavior is teacher immediacy, and it can improve communication and the student-teacher interpersonal bond (Cakir, 2015; Derakhshan, Eslami, et al., 2022; Teo et al., 2022 ; Wang & Derakhshan, 2023). Immediacy may create learners’ optimistic emotional responses (Gregersen, 2005). Gregersen (2005) hypothesized that EFL teachers might best impact student emotions through their own nonverbal signals and prompt actions. Teacher immediacy encompasses a wide range of specific interactions (Rugen, 2018) and typically refers to both verbal and non-verbal exchanges that cultivate student feelings of proximity, closeness, and inclusion (Lee, 2019). Rhetorical-relational objective theory reminds us that educators have specific objectives that they strive to achieve in their classrooms (Myers, 2008). Mottet et al. (2006), noted that teachers who utilize rhetorical instructional interactions do so to enhance instructional quality of teaching. These behaviors, including clarity and immediacy, promote learner-instructor connections and create suitable classroom environments (Titsworth et al., 2015).

In this study, we examined EFL students’ self-reported boredom since boredom is an element of psychological well-being that impacts educational achievement and affects students’ mental well-being and success (Suldo et al., 2013). Indeed, in academic settings, boredom can lead learners to disassociate from educational tasks, evade engagement with teachers and classmates, lose interest in completing learning assignments, and detach from the learning path (Tvedt et al., 2019). In the language learning domain, learners who experience negative emotions may not accept more input, may narrow their learning focus and may limit their range of language input (MacIntyre & Gregersen, 2012). Moreover, boredom is new in L2 education, and the few studies that have addressed this critical emotion have been limited to analyzing its causes and solutions. Boredom can develop and become ingrained due to a variety of factors and influences, including those related to learners, educators, educational materials, and equipment (Li, 2021). In terms of learner-centered factors, low language skills, lack of motivation, disinterest, fatigue, and negative evaluation are the main causes of boredom. The reasons for boredom in the classroom include inadequate teaching skills, delayed feedback, unexciting presentations, and lack of rapport between the teacher and students.

In this research, we hoped to fill specific gaps in the educational literature that include our limited understanding of L2 learners’ boredom experiences, based on just a few prior works (Derakhshan, Fathi, et al., 2021; Derakhshan, Kruk, et al., 2022; Li, 2021; Pawlak et al., 2020). Additionally, there has been a dearth of research on the effects of teacher clarity and immediacy on learners’ boredom. We expected increased awareness of these two interpersonal teacher behaviors and their roles in learners’ boredom to assist educational managers in their efforts to help teachers recognize and diminish this negative emotion.

Boredom in L2 Learning

Boredom is a frequently encountered feeling of disengagement in educational environments (Kruk, 2021); it refers to a condition of incongruity with repetitive experiences, such as routine tasks, interacting with boring individuals, and feeling unable to escape an aversively dull environment (Dewaele & Li, 2021; Pawlak et al., 2020; Wang, 2023). Boredom in L2 classes is an uncomfortable emotional or psychological condition that is linked to decreased physical and cognitive stimulation, distinct temporal perceptions, and inclinations to detach from one’s surroundings (Li, 2021). L2 boredom is a combination of discontentment, distress, irritation, inattentiveness, lack of drive to follow established objectives, and diminished energy (Kruk & Zawodniak, 2018; Wang et al., 2022). It pervades educational environments and has consequences on different facets of education, including personal involvement, thinking, drive, self-control, study techniques, and success (Daniels et al., 2015). A salient underlying theory of successful learning, proposed by Fredrickson (2003), is the Broaden-and-Build Theory in which the central principle is that constructive feelings expand students’ repertoires of thought-action while negative feelings shrink them. So, improving positive emotions and preventing negative ones, such as boredom, become central. Also, in line with Control-Value Theory (CVT) and similar to other distinct educational emotions (such as pleasure and anxiety), boredom is subject to a three-faceted classification system of valence, activation/arousal, and objective focus (Pekrun, 2006; Putwain et al., 2018). Valence pertains to how favorable or unfavorable an experience may be; activation is related to the level of the individual’s emotionally related physical or mental arousal; and objective focus notes whether the emotion is primarily connected to an ongoing activity or its eventual outcome. In this classification system, boredom can be understood as a negative feeling arising with low arousal from continuous uninteresting educational activities that may be triggered by current or anticipated educational outcomes (Pekrun & Perry, 2014).

Teacher Immediacy

The teacher-student relationship is a crucial aspect of teaching, and teacher immediacy refers to a feeling of closeness students feel with teachers that leads learners to engage and succeed (Xie & Derakhshan, 2021). Dixson et al. (2016) highlighted that teacher immediacy can be expressed verbally (e.g., through humor and stories) or nonverbally (e.g., through physical gestures like nodding or smiles). Verbal immediacy refers to the structural variations in teachers’ statements, upon which learners determine whether they appreciate or dislike a message (Velez & Cano, 2012). Verbal teacher immediacy motivates learners to form relationships with instructors both during and outside of educational tasks (Violanti et al., 2018). Similarly, non-verbal immediacy is any nonverbal strategy teachers use to reduce their emotional or physical distance from students (Peng, 2020), including nonverbal actions that foster intimacy and familiarity and draw the learner’s attention to the teacher, the subject matter, and the curriculum (Derakhshan, 2021). Richmond (2002) provided a synthesis of the educational outcomes associated with immediate behavior. These effects encompassed heightened emotional engagement for both the educator and the course content, enhanced cognitive learning, increased learner motivation, improved communication between educators and learners, reduced resistance towards instructors, lowered levels of classroom anxiety, diminished perceived status differences between learners and educators, heightened perceptions of the educator’s clarity and credibility, and elevated overall evaluations. Teacher immediacy behaviors support educational experiences in foreign languages in which positive feelings have significant roles (Hsu, 2010; MacIntyre & Gregersen, 2012).

Teacher Clarity

Teacher clarity alludes to interpersonal interaction abilities (Xie & Derakhshan, 2021); it is a high-inference concept that refers to the teacher’s use of verbal and non-verbal interaction cues to make education clearer and to boost comprehension and acquisition of course procedures and instructional materials (Violanti et al., 2018). These clarity clues encompass restating key points, incorporating visual aids, screening materials, emphasizing main concepts, providing examples, and reshaping ideas (Limperos et al., 2015). With these techniques, educators can enhance students’ comprehension and be more explicit (Segabutla & Evans, 2019). Thus, teacher clarity enables students and educators to better understand one another (Titsworth et al., 2015). Based on Chesebro and McCroskey’s (2001) interpretation of teacher clarity, employing suitable verbal and nonverbal communication is essential to increase clarity. As Rodgers & Raider-Roth (2006) asserted, teachers with clear behavior communicate clearly, structure course material clearly, and convey knowledge successfully.

Related Research

Past investigators delved into how the behavior of L2 (second language) teachers in terms of their immediacy and clarity related to learners’ boredom within language learning contexts (Hu & Wang, 2023). As noted, immediacy pertains to actions that foster a sense of closeness and interaction between teachers and students, whereas clarity relates to the precision of instruction and communication There have been notable correlations found between teacher immediacy, clarity, and students’ engagement (Zheng, 2021). Furthermore, teacher enthusiasm and clarity have correlated with decreased boredom (Qin, 2021; Song, 2022). However, beyond teachers’ immediacy and professional dedication, other factors also contribute to learners' boredom (Guo et al., 2022). Overall, past findings (Guo et al., 2022; Qin, 2021; Song, 2022) underscored the significance of teacher-student interaction and lucid communication in alleviating boredom and fostering engagement in language learning environments.

Several recent studies emphasized both teachers’ interpersonal behaviors and learners’ emotions in both general education and in the EFL domain. For instance, Mazer et al. (2014) examined how teacher’s non-verbal immediacy related to students’ destructive emotions in three major United States colleges involving 753 students’ completion of various scales. In Structural Equation Modeling analyses teachers’ non-verbal immediacy actions were strongly linked to learners’ annoyance, anxiety, humiliation, urgency, and boredom. Ballester (2015) also examined correlations between teacher immediacy and student anxiety. Data from 108 students who completed two scales in this study indicated that the dearth of teachers’ self-assurance was significantly related to a lack of teacher immediacy that was, in turn, associated with learners’ higher anxiety. Tonsing (2018) explored correlations between student statistics anxiety and the level of teacher immediacy. Survey scale data from these 113 students suggested that heightened teacher immediacy behaviors were associated with diminished students’ anxiety levels. Gholamrezaee and Ghanizadeh (2018) investigated the interplay of EFL teachers’ immediacy actions, learners’ self-fulfillment, self-esteem, stress management, cognitive acquisition, and emotional fatigue. In this study, EFL learners (n = 206) completed five questionnaires regarding their characteristics and characteristics of their EFL instructors. Utilizing SEM, these researchers discovered that teacher immediacy actions were positively associated with all measured student characteristics, particularly their self-fulfillment. Derakhshan et al. (2021), investigated the causes of boredom in virtual education as a novel method of teaching. They discovered that the activities and tasks teachers assign in their classrooms have an impact on EFL learners’ boredom. They contended that the use of teachers' immediacy can be a definite way to decrease EFL students’ boredom and enhance their participation in language classes. Derakhshan, 2022a stated that successful teacher-student interpersonal relationships and interactions can bolster learning gains in EFL classes and simplify students’ paths of learning.

Derakhshan, Eslami, et al. (2022) inspected the interplay of EFL teachers’ immediacy behaviors and praise on their students’ burnout. To achieve this objective, 631 EFL learners completed three separate surveys, providing information about themselves and their teachers. Through SEM analysis, these researchers discovered a statistically significant inverse relationship between the various dimensions of student burnout and the immediacy and praise dimensions of teacher behavior. Subsequently, Derakhshan et al. (2023) investigated how instructors’ clarity and nonverbal immediacy related to the affective learning of 756 Chinese and 715 Iranian EFL students. According to findings from a presumptive path analysis, clarity, and nonverbal immediacy both positively predicted educator perception and affective learning; educator comprehension also significantly predicted effective learning, with comprehension playing an important positive role in the connection between variables and affective learning.

From this literature review it is clear that certain teacher behaviors are strongly associated with students’ learning behaviors. In the present study, we sought to consider remaining research gaps regarding the specific inclusion of teacher immediacy and clarity as related to student boredom, and we articulated the following research question:

RQ: To what extent might teacher immediacy and clarity predict students’ boredom in a Structural Equation Modeling analysis?

Method

Research Design

We employed a correlation-based research approach, typical in descriptive quantitative inquiry, in which we aimed to test, through structural equation modeling (SEM), the extent to which presumed interconnections between three variables of interest actually occurred. Specifically, we presumed that student-perceived teacher clarity and teacher immediacy would each significantly predict self-reported student boredom, and we were interested in the magnitude of these relationships.

Ethical Considerations

Before conducting this representative study in China, we acquired authorization through the necessary channels. We first obtained approval from relevant authorities responsible for overseeing research activities within the country. This process entailed submitting a formal proposal outlining the study’s objectives, methodology, potential impact, and ethical considerations to the appropriate regulatory body and institutional review board (IRB). This process ensured that the study adhered to established ethical guidelines, safeguarded participant rights and welfare, and complied with all applicable laws and regulations governing research conduct in China. By obtaining prior authorization, the researchers demonstrated their commitment to conducting the study responsibly and ethically, contributing to the validity and credibility of the research findings. All participants signed an informed consent document on an online survey platform prior to completing the questionnaires that were the primary procedures for this study. The consent form provided an overview of the study, an estimation of the time required for its completion, and gave participants the prerogative to withdraw from the study at each step. Notably, participants were assured of their anonymity and informed that their data would be used exclusively for research objectives.

Participants

We employed convenience sampling to gather 383 EFL students from universities and colleges across nine provinces and one autonomous region in China. After excluding three participants for incomplete responses, 380 participants) presented valid data for further analyses (122 males, 258 females; aged 18–27 years). Our participants represented a diverse range of EFL learning levels, encompassing undergraduates to postgraduates in English language teaching. Detailed participant demographic information is presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Participants’ Demographic Information.

	N	%
Sex
Male	122	31.9
Female	258	68.1
Total	383	100
Age
18–20	217	56.9
21–23	141	37
24–27	22	6.1
Total (valid)	380	100
Total	380	100

Measurement Scales

Teacher Clarity Scale

We had participants complete the 10-item edition of the Teacher Clarity Scale (Chesebro & McCroskey, 1998) to evaluate student perceptions of teachers’ instructional clarity. Some sample items of this scale are “My teacher is not clear when defining guidelines for out-of-class assignments” or “My teacher uses clear and relevant examples.” The learners’ responses to these questions were on a five-point Likert-style scale, ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). The reverse-scored items in this scale are scored in a way that assigns higher scores to responses indicating lower levels of clarity, and lower scores to responses indicating higher levels of clarity. For example, if a statement reflects a lack of clarity, such as “The teacher’s instructions were confusing,” it might be scored on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates strong disagreement and 5 indicates strong agreement. In this case, a response of 5 would be reverse-scored to a 1, indicating high clarity, while a response of 1 would be reverse-scored to a 5, indicating low clarity. Interpreting reverse-scored items involves understanding that higher scores represent lower levels of the construct being measured, in this case, teacher clarity. Therefore, higher overall scores on the Teacher Clarity Scale, after reverse-scoring the appropriate items, suggest lower levels of perceived teacher clarity, while lower scores suggest higher levels of perceived teacher clarity. This scoring method ensures that higher scores consistently reflect greater agreement with statements indicating lower teacher clarity, maintaining the scale’s internal consistency and validity. The internal consistency of this measurement calculated through Composite Reliability (CR) was 0.879, and the scale’s validity was confirmed, see Table 3.

Teacher Immediacy Scale

Gorham (1988) incorporated specific elements of both verbal and nonverbal teacher immediacy as described by Richmond et al. (1987) in developing the Immediacy Behavior Scale used in this study. Gorham (1988) formulated a series of 31 questions and validated the scale with a group of American college students majoring in communication. The scale measures student perceptions of teacher immediacy. Some sample items are “Smiles at individual students in the class” or “Uses a variety of vocal expressions while talking to the class.” Student responses can range from 0 (signifying “never”) to 4, (signifying “very often”). Participants were directed to assess the frequency of communication methods displayed by one of their current English college teachers throughout their time in the course. The scale’s reliability through CR was 0.911 (see Table 3).

Students’ Boredom Scale

We also used the Student’s Boredom Scale developed by Ali El Deen and Mohamed (2023) following a systematic review of related literature (e.g., Pawlak et al., 2020; Pekrun et al., 2010). This scale consists of 35 questions that evaluate the reasons behind learners’ self-reported boredom. Some sample items on this scale are “I feel bored in English classes because I have a limited English language ability” or “I feel bored in English classes because I cannot see any progress in my English language ability.” These questions are divided into categories. The first factor is related to Demotivation (8 items), the second factor is related to Language learning ability (5 items), the third factor is Skills-based courses and over-challenging tasks (8 items), the fourth factor is Learning through unfamiliar instructional techniques (3items), the fifth factor is related to Teacher feedback areas (6 items), the sixth factor is related to Under-challenging tasks (2 items), the seventh factor is related to Classroom mode, permanent correction, and redundancy (3 items). Respondents used a five-point Likert scale to rate items (5 = always to 1 = never). The scale’s reliability through CR was 0.932 (see Table 3).

Data Collection

Since our participants were EFL students with a likelihood of limited English proficiency, we presented the questionnaires in Chinese. Following the translation of the questionnaire from English to Chinese, we uploaded it to Wenjuanxing, a Chinese online platform for creating and disseminating surveys. Subsequently, we shared it via WeChat. Participants accessed the questionnaire by scanning its QR code with their mobile phones and completing it following comprehensive directions. Before proceeding to the questionnaires, they were presented with the detailed consent form described above. While there was no time constraint for completing the scales, participants took an average of 9 minutes. The data collection phase extended for more than one month, encompassing September 11 to October 14, 2023.

Data Analysis

We utilized advanced statistical methodologies to comprehensively analyze our data. Initially, we assessed the construct validity of our questionnaires through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in AMOS version 24. Additionally, we calculated Pearson correlation coefficients to examine the relationships between variables. Subsequently, we employed structural equation modeling (SEM) to explore complex relationships between the variables of interest, ensuring goodness of fit and model adequacy. We set the level of statistical significance at p < .05, adhering to conventional practices in social science research. For correlational analyses, we considered correlations with a magnitude above 0.3 as statistically significant, in line with established guidelines. To ensure robust analysis, we utilized sophisticated statistical tools including SPSS version 27 and AMOS version 24 software applications. Initially, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess the construct validity of the administered questionnaires. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was then employed to delve into the intricate presumptive relationships between the variables of interest. Additionally, we employed various methodologies such as reliability assessment, correlational analysis, and Multiple Linear Regression to thoroughly examine the dataset and derive meaningful insights.

Results

The CFA applied to the questionnaire items collectively produced three distinct factors that provided construct validity support to our intent to measure student perceived teacher clarity, teacher immediacy, and student boredom in the classroom. Moreover, in support of the discriminative validity of these constructs, teacher clarity and teacher immediacy, both presumed to be strategies for effective teaching, were positively and significantly correlated with one another, and both were negatively correlated with students’ self-reported boredom in the classroom. At the level of item consistency, all items correlated consistently with each of their factor loadings (ranging from 0.52 to 0.58), and the collective survey’s overall internal item consistency was good. Figure 1 depicts these data.

Figure 1.

Final Modified CFA Model.

The findings in Table 2 demonstrate that the model exhibited a favorable goodness of fit, indicating that it adequately represented the underlying data structure. Specifically, the various determinants used to assess model fit all indicated satisfactory outcomes. The CMIN/DF ratio, which stood at 3.482, fell within an acceptable range, suggesting that the model fit the data adequately, relative to the degrees of freedom. Additionally, key fit indices, such as the Incremental Fit Index (IFI) with a value of 0.911 and the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) at 0.912, exceeded their recommended thresholds (Nakai et al., 2019), further affirming the model’s goodness of fit. Moreover, the Parsimony Normed Fit Index (PNFI) of 0.576 and the Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) of 0.918 both indicated favorable model fits. Lastly, the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) value of 0.074 fell within acceptable limits, corroborating the model’s adequacy in representing the observed data patterns.

Table 2.

Evaluation of Goodness of Fit Through CFA.

Criteria		Threshold
Criteria		Terrible	Satisfactory	Excellent	Evaluation
CMIN	6800.346
DF	1953
CMIN/DF	3.482	>5	>3	>1	Satisfactory
RMSEA	.074	>0.08	<0.08	<0.06	Satisfactory
IFI	.911	<0.9	>0.9	>0.95	Satisfactory
CFI	.912	<0.9	>0.9	>0.95	Satisfactory
PNFI	.576	<0.5	>0.5		Satisfactory
TLI	.918	>0.9	>0.9	>0.95	Satisfactory

Note. CMIN = Chi-Square; DF = Degrees of Freedom; RMSEA = Root Mean Square of Approximation; IFI = Incremental Fit Index; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; PNFI = Parsimony Normed Fit; TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index.

The results presented in Table 3 indicate that the composite reliability values for all the questionnaires reflected good internal item consistency. Moreover, all subscales presented AVE values higher than 0.50 confirming the validity of the model (Boateng et al., 2018). Furthermore, there was a significant, strong, positive relationship between teachers’ immediacy and teachers’ clarity, r (377) = .82, p < .001. Teachers’ immediacy and students’ boredom were found to be strongly negatively correlated, r (377) = −.72, p < .001. The variables teachers’ clarity and students’ boredom were found to be strongly negatively correlated, r (377) = −.66, p < .001. In addition, a regression analysis was conducted in AMOS (version 24) and the results are accessible in the following figures and tables (Figure 2).

Table 3.

Composite Reliability and Discriminant Validity of the Variables.

	CR	AVE	MSV	MaxR(H)	Teachers’ Immediacy	Teachers’ Clarity	Students’ Boredom
Teachers’ immediacy	0.911	0.896	0.832	0.862	0.947
Teachers’ clarity	0.879	0.842	0.817	0.879	0.822***	0.918
Students’ boredom	0.932	0.737	0.615	0.875	−0.721***	−0.657***	0.859

Note. CR = Composite Reliability; AVE = Average Variance Extracted; MSV = Maximum Shared Variance MaxR(H) = Maximum Reliability; *** = p < .001.

Figure 2.

Final Measurement Models.

The data shown in Table 4 indicate a substantial relationship between teachers’ behaviors and students' boredom levels. Specifically, approximately 48% of the variability in learners’ boredom can be attributed to the level of teacher immediacy, with a significant beta coefficient of 0.47 (p = .001). Additionally, it is noteworthy that 53% of the fluctuations in students’ boredom can be elucidated by teacher clarity, as indicated by a significant beta coefficient of 0.53 (p = .002).

Table 4.

Structural Model Assessment.

Parameter	Estimate	Lower	Upper	p
Teachers’ immediacy	.476	.221	.453	.001
Teachers’ clarity	.532	.132	.281	.002

Discussion

In this study, we examined whether teacher immediacy and teacher clarity predicted EFL learners’ boredom. We based an assumption of this finding on earlier research (e.g., Derakhshan, 2021; Derakhshan et al., 2023; Kelly et al., 2015). Our findings supported a significant negative association between both teacher immediacy and teacher clarity and EFL students’ self-reported boredom.

From a theoretical viewpoint, our finding of this connection between language instructors’ immediacy and students’ boredom lends support to rhetorical/relational goal theory, drawn from Hosek and Houser (2018), which holds that teachers should use practical interpersonal skills like immediacy to create a motivating setting in the classroom that lessens students’ feelings of boredom. Hosek and Houser (2018) contended that educators who adeptly employed effective interpersonal communication strategies can address learners’ relational and rhetorical needs and are likely to achieve better results. These results encompassed enhanced learning, heightened interest, increased engagement, empowerment, motivation, and academic achievement, all of which collectively serve to lessen L2 learners’ experiences of boredom. According to this theory, educators use immediacy in communication to achieve a variety of objectives, including enhancing student perception of understanding and conveying learning. Indeed, immediacy aids interpersonal objectives (Finn & Schrodt, 2012). As a result, teacher immediacy and clarity work in tandem to achieve educational goals like positive affective experiences (Derakhshan, 2022b). Mercer & Dornyei (2020) emphasize the significance of teachers’ positive interactions with students in the context of foreign language learning and teaching due to the relational nature of the process, highlighting the beneficial impact of clarity and immediacy.

Based on this theoretical perspective and our findings of strong associations between these variables of interest, we contend that learners are less likely to become bored when they perceive their teacher to be using or planning to use a variety of personal examples and humor, become involved in dialogs with them, compliment their work, and be accessible to them outside of class. Furthermore, students’ boredom can be reduced, and their emotional engagement in class is increased by a teacher who smiles, uses warm vocal cues, makes eye contact, and moves close to them. Our data are in line with data from other studies that consider negative emotions, such as Cakir’s (2015) study, which found a strong negative association between teacher immediacy and burnout. Additionally, the teacher immediacy can help students manage stress in their academic environments (Gholamrezaee & Ghanizadeh, 2018). When students feel personally close to their teacher, they can better handle challenges in the classroom in a way that does not affect their performance in class. Our results also align with Lei et al. (2017) who observed through regression analysis that teacher support and immediacy were significant predictors of positive emotions, including satisfaction, optimism, pride, and relief. Notably, teacher support and immediacy exhibited an inverse relationship with anxiety, a negative emotional state. Our findings are also in agreement with investigations that showed that teacher immediacy was associated with students’ lessened negative emotions, such as learning anxiety (Ballester, 2015; Kelly et al., 2015; Violanti et al., 2018). We infer from these associations that constructive teacher relational behaviors, such as verbal and nonverbal immediacy, support the development of a welcoming learning setting, which diminishes learners’ negative issues such as stress, apprehension, and boredom.

An instructive teacher-learner relationship provides a stress-free environment wherein students’ mental health can be enhanced (Luo et al., 2020). Luo et al. (2020) claimed that students’ empathy with their teachers helped them reduce personal stress and boredom. This outcome agrees with Mazer et al.’s (2014) finding of associations between teachers’ nonverbal immediacy and students’ negative affections. Specifically, they found significant correlations between learners’ annoyance, nervousness, embarrassment, boredom, and the teacher’s nonverbal immediacy behaviors. In the field of EFL, effective communication skills in the classroom are widely regarded as one of the key attributes of a skilled teacher. The employment of nonverbal communication by teachers serves to capture the students’ attention, facilitate comprehension, and instill motivation, thereby engendering enthusiasm in disengaged learners. The learners implicitly perceive nonverbal cues emanating from the teacher, prompting them to discern whether the educator is actively engaged in instruction or disengaged and awaiting the conclusion of the class (Hsu, 2010).

Additionally, teacher clarity has been found to relate to learners’ feelings, as students in both English and Chinese classrooms enjoyed the material more and became less bored when the instructor was clear (Chen & Lu, 2022). Regarding the role of teacher clarity in students’ boredom, our results in this area also with rhetorical and relational goal theory. Based on this theory, teacher clarity can boost students’ perception of learning. Similarly, Derakhshan (2022b) proposed that success in the EFL realm results from effective teacher-student relational interactions, which happens through EFL teachers’ emotional and social understanding of learners. Also, Zheng (2021) specified that a clear teacher who can successfully shape and teach a course syllabus can physically and spiritually involve learners in their classes.

Limitations and Directions for Further Research

Regarding this study’s limitations, these data were collected through questionnaires measuring student’s subjective perceptions, and it is possible that other observers would have reported teacher behaviors differently. Through quantitative methodology, we examined associations between the variables of interest but cannot infer causal relationships between these variables. It may be useful for future investigators to add qualitative data gathered through interviews and even to use data from a neutral classroom observer to triangulate the data with a mixed-methods approach to improve overall data quality. Chinese learners were the participants in this study, and their experiences may or may not generalize to other EFL students. Future researchers should replicate these findings in other samples and might engage in prospective inquiries to investigate how different instructor characteristics, such as personality types, may affect students. Furthermore, carrying out replications in learning contexts other than EFL classes would enhance our understanding of these variables. We highly recommend that future investigators explore the potential influence of such diverse situational factors as students’ age, gender, and educational levels as potential mediators between teacher clarity and immediacy and students’ boredom.

Conclusion

Emotions are fundamental components of individuals’ well-being, and it stands to reason that increasing positive emotions can enhance well-being. Therefore, lessening negative emotions should also be beneficial for L2 learners’ mental health. In fact, boredom, characterized as a result of physical, social, and psychological challenges, can adversely affect learners’ achievement, and teachers’ immediacy positively relates to learners’ academic motivation and positive affect, decreasing learners’ anxiety, and improving their engagement. Teachers displaying immediacy can build favorable relationships with learners by establishing a positive classroom environment in which students get bored less and consequently perform better. Similarly, teacher clarity in EFL contexts can decrease or even remove negative feelings like boredom, as clarity generates course comprehension, constructive relationships, credibility, and attentiveness. Our results in the current inquiry lent substantial support to these themes and to their underlying theories, as we found through Structural Equation Modeling that both student-perceived teacher immediacy and teacher clarity predicted decreased self-reported student boredom.

Our findings have important implications for educators, because they reveal the consequences of teachers’ behaviors and can serve to help teachers become more aware of their immediate behaviors and clarity so as to foster a pleasant learning environment in which they can reduce students’ boredom and anxiety. Educators can offer practical techniques to instructor trainees to enhance educator-learner immediacy and clarity. Teacher trainers can use this relevant research to better recognize teacher behavioral traits that help reduce learners’ boredom and take suitable measures to encourage their adoption. Likewise, acquiring knowledge about these variables can empower university administrators to foster enthusiasm among their teachers and strengthen their interpersonal qualities, ultimately reducing learners’ experiences of boredom.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by Chaohu University. This university has no role in the design and implementation of this study. The author wishes to thank Chaohu University for its support. The author is also grateful to the insightful comments suggested by the editor and the anonymous reviewers.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

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

Funding

The study reported in this paper represents a contribution to the research project “Research on the Application of O-AMAS Teaching Model under the Guide of Positive Psychology”(Grant No.2022jyxm1507) funded by the provincial teaching and research projects of Anhui province and “A corpus-based study on the overseas dissemination and international image construction of Sun Tzu's Art of War” (Grant No.2023AH052081) funded by key project of scientific research in Colleges and Universities of Anhui Province (Philosophy and Social Sciences).

Ethical Statement

ORCID iDs

Jieping Xu

Yuehong Pan

Ali Derakhshan

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.*

Author Biographies

Jieping Xu works as an Associate Professor in Applied Linguistics at the College of Foreign Languages, Chaohu University, China. He once obtained his MA in TESOL from the Graduate School of Foreign Languages at Hefei University of Technology, China, and got his Ph.D degree in Semiotics and Cultural Studies. He has been focusing his research on the theory and practice of EFL teaching and learning, esp. the application of positive psychology in English teaching and learning, as well as semiotics and crosscultural communication.

Yuehong Pan is a lecturer in Applied Linguistics at the College of Foreign Languages, Chaohu University, China. She obtained her bachelor degree at Huaibei Normal University. She got her master’s degree, majored in English education at Anhui University, China. She has been focusing her research on the theory and practice of second language acquisition.

Ali Derakhshan is Professor of Applied Linguistics at the English Language and Literature Department, Golestan University, Gorgan, Iran. He has been a member of the Iranian Elites Foundation since 2015. He has also been selected as a distinguished researcher by the Teaching English Language and Literature Society of Iran in 2021. His name appeared in Stanford University’s list of world’s top 2% of most influential scientists in 2022 and 2023. He has published in accredited international journals, including Computers and Education, Review of Educational Research, Language Teaching Research, System, Assessing Writing, Applied Linguistics Review, Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, ELT Journal, English for Specific Purposes, International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, International Journal of Applied Linguistics, Thinking Skills and Creativity, Current Psychology, Asia Pacific Education Researcher, European Journal of Education, Educational Studies, Pragmatics and Society, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, Porta Linguarum, Revista Ibérica, etc. His monograph The “5Cs” positive teacher interpersonal behaviors: Implications for learner empowerment and learning in an L2 context was published by Springer in 2022. His co-authored book Instructed second language pragmatics for the speech acts of request, apology, and refusal: A meta-analysis has been recently published by Springer. His research interests are positive psychology, teacher education, learner individual differences, cross-cultural interpersonal factors in educational psychology, interlanguage pragmatics, and intercultural communication.

References

Ali El Deen

A. A. M. M.

Mohamed

A. A. M.

(2023). Students’ boredom in English language classes: Voices from Saudi Arabia. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1108372. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1108372

Ballester

E. P.

(2015). Verbal and nonverbal teacher immediacy and foreign language anxiety in an EFL university course. Porta Linguarum, 23(3), 9–24. https://doi.org/10.30827/Digibug.53759

Benevene

De Stasio

Fiorilli

(2020). Well-being of school teachers in their work environment. Frontier in Psycholology, 11(2), 12–39. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01239

Boateng

G. O.

Neilands

T. B.

Frongillo

E. A.

Melgar-Quiñonez

H. R.

Young

S. L.

(2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, 149–157. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149

Bolkan

(2017). Development and validation of the clarity indicators scale. Communication Education, 66(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2016.1202994

Cakir

S. G.

(2015). The effects of teacher immediacy and student burnout on empowerment and resistance among Turkish pre-service teachers. Learning and Individual Differences, 40(2), 170–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.05.002

Chen

(2022). How classroom management and instructional clarity relate to students’ academic emotions in Hong Kong and England: A multi-group analysis based on the control-value theory. Learning and Individual Differences, 98(2), Article 102183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2022.102183

Chesebro

J. L.

McCroskey

J. C.

(1998). The development of the teacher clarity short inventory (TCSI) to measure clear teaching in the classroom. Communication Research Reports, 15(3), 262–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824099809362122

Chesebro

J. L.

McCroskey

J. C.

(2001). The relationship of teacher clarity and immediacy with student state receiver apprehension, affect, and cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520109379232

10.

Daniels

L. M.

Tze

V. M. C.

Goetz

(2015). Examining boredom: Different causes for different coping profiles. Learning and Individual Differences, 37(2), 255–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.11.004

11.

Derakhshan

(2021). The predictability of Turkman students’ academic engagement through Persian language teachers’ nonverbal immediacy and credibility. Journal of Teaching Persian to Speakers of Other Languages, 10(21), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.30479/JTPSOL.2021.14654.1506

12.

Derakhshan

(2022a). Revisiting research on positive psychology in second and foreign language education: Trends and directions. Language Related Research, 13(5), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.52547/lrr.13.5.2

13.

Derakhshan

(2022b). The “5Cs” positive teacher interpersonal behaviors: Implications for learner empowerment and learning in an L2 context. Springer. https://link.springer.com/book/9783031165276

14.

Derakhshan

Doliński

Zhaleh

Enayat

M. J.

Fathi

(2022). A mixed-methods cross-cultural study of teacher care and teacher-student rapport in Iranian and Polish university students’ engagement in pursuing academic goals in an L2 context. System, 106(3), Article 102790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102790

15.

Derakhshan

Eslami

Z. R.

Curle

Zhaleh

(2022). Exploring the predictive role of teacher immediacy and stroke behaviors in English as a foreign language university students’ academic burnout. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 12(1), 87–115. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.1.5

16.

Derakhshan

Fathi

Pawlak

Kruk

(2022). Classroom social climate, growth language mindset, and student engagement: The mediating role of boredom in learning English as a foreign language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2099407

17.

Derakhshan

Kruk

Mehdizadeh

Pawlak

(2021). Boredom in online classes in the Iranian EFL context: Sources and solutions. System, 101(3), Article 102556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102556

18.

Derakhshan

Kruk

Mehdizadeh

Pawlak

(2022). Activity-induced boredom in online EFL classes. ELT Journal, 76(1), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccab072

19.

Derakhshan

Yin

(2024). Do positive emotions prompt students to be more active? Unraveling the role of hope, pride, and enjoyment in predicting Chinese and Iranian EFL students’ academic engagement. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2024.2329166

20.

Derakhshan

Zhang

L. J.

Zhaleh

(2023). The effects of instructor clarity and non-verbal immediacy on Chinese and Iranian EFL students’ affective learning: The mediating role of instructor understanding. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 13(1), 71–100. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.31733

21.

Dewaele

J. M.

(2021). Teacher enthusiasm and students’ social behavioral learning engagement: The mediating role of student enjoyment and boredom in Chinese EFL classes. Language Teaching Research, 25(6), 922. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211014538

22.

Dewaele

J. M.

(2022). Foreign language enjoyment and anxiety: Associations with general and domain–specific English achievement. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 45(1), 32–48. https://doi.org/10.1515/CJAL-2022-0104

23.

Dixson

M. D.

Greenwell

M. R.

Rogers-Stacy

Weister

Lauer

(2016). Nonverbal immediacy behaviors and online student engagement: Bringing past instructional research into the present virtual classroom. Communication Education, 66(1), 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2016.1209222

24.

Finn

A. N.

Schrodt

(2012). Students’ perceived understanding mediates the effects of teacher clarity and nonverbal immediacy on learner empowerment. Communication Education, 61(2), 111–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2012.656669

25.

Fredrickson

B. L.

(2003). The value of positive emotions: The emerging science of positive psychology is coming to understand why it’s good to feel good. American Scientist, 91(4), 330–335. https://doi.org/10.1511/2003.26.865, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27858244

26.

Gholamrezaee

Ghanizadeh

(2018). EFL teachers’ verbal and nonverbal immediacy: A study of its impact on students’ emotional states, cognitive learning, and burnout. Psychological Studies, 63(4), 398–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-018-0467-5

27.

Goetz

Frenzel

A. C.

Hall

N. C.

Nett

U. E.

Pekrun

Lipnevich

A. A.

(2014). Types of boredom: An experience sampling approach. Motivation and Emotion, 38(3), 401–419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-013-9385-y

28.

Goldberg

Y. K.

Eastwood

J. D.

LaGuardia

Danckert

(2011). Boredom: An emotional experience distinct from apathy, anhedonia, or depression. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30(6), 647–666. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2011.30.6.647

29.

Gorham

(1988). The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student learning. Communication Education, 37(1), 40–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634528809378702

30.

Gregersen

T. S.

(2005). Nonverbal cues: Clues to the detection of foreign language anxiety. Foreign language annals, 38(3), 388–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2005.tb02225.x

31.

Guo

Gao

Shen

(2022). L2 enjoyment of English as a Foreign Language students: Does teacher verbal and non-verbal immediacy Matter? Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 897698. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.897698

32.

Habash

S. H.

(2010). Exploring the relationship between perceived teacher nonverbal immediacy and perceived teacher misbehaviors on student course retention in urban community colleges (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of California, LA, USA.

33.

Hosek

A. M.

Houser

M. L.

(2018). Introduction to instructional communication methodological approaches. In Houser

M. L.

Hosek

A. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives (pp. 207–208). Routledge.

34.

Hsu

(2010). The impact of perceived teachers’ nonverbal immediacy on students’ motivation for learning English. Asian EFL Journal, 12(4), 188–204. https://www.asian-efl-journal.com

35.

Wang

(2023). The predicting role of EFL teachers’ immediacy behaviors in students’ willingness to communicate and academic engagement. BMC Psychology, 11(1), 318–324. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01378-x

36.

Kelly

Rice

Wyatt

Ducking

Denton

(2015). Teacher immediacy and decreased student quantitative reasoning anxiety: The mediating effect of perception. Communication Education, 64(2), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2015.1014383

37.

Kruk

(2021). Investigating dynamic relationships among individual difference variables in learning English as a Foreign Language in a virtual world. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65269-2

38.

Kruk

Pawlak

Elahi Shirvan

Taherian

Yazdanmehr

(2022). Potential sources of foreign language learning boredom: A Q methodology study. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 12(1), 37–58. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.1.3

39.

Kruk

Zawodniak

(2018). Boredom in practical English language classes: Insights from interview data. In Szymanski

Zawodniak

Łobodziec

Smoluk

(Eds.), Interdisciplinary views on the English language, literature and culture (pp. 177–191). Zielona Gora: Uniwersytet Zielonogorski.

40.

Kruk

Zawodniak

(2020). A comparative study of the experience of boredom in the L2 and L3 classroom. English Teaching & Learning, 44(4), 417–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42321-020-00056-0

41.

Lee

J. H.

(2019). Relationships among students’ perceptions of native and non-native EFL teachers’ immediacy behaviours and credibility and students’ willingness to communicate in class. Oxford Review of Education, 46(2), 153–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2019.1642187

42.

Lei

Cui

Chiu

M. M.

(2017). The relationship between teacher support and students’ academic emotions: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(2), 2288. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02288

43.

(2021). A control–value theory approach to boredom in English classes among university students in China. The Modern Language Journal, 105(1), 317–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2020.12.002

44.

Limperos

A. M.

Buckner

M. M.

Kaufmann

Frisby

B. N.

(2015). Online teaching and technological affordances: An experimental investigation into the impact of modality and clarity on perceived and actual learning. Computers & Education, 83(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.015

45.

Luo

Deng

Zhang

(2020). The influences of parental emotional warmth on the association between perceived teacher–student relationships and academic stress among middle school students in China. Children and Youth Services Review, 114, Article 105014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105014

46.

MacIntyre

Gregersen

(2012). Emotions that facilitate language learning: The positive broadening power of the imagination. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 193–213. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2012.2.2.4

47.

MacIntyre

P. D.

(2017). An overview of language anxiety research and trends in its development. In Gkonou

Daubney

Dewaele

J. M.

(Eds.), New insights into language anxiety: Theory, research and educational implications (pp. 11–30). Multilingual Matters.

48.

Mazer

J. P.

McKenna-Buchanan

T. P.

Quinlan

M. M.

Titsworth

(2014). The dark side of emotion in the classroom: Emotional processes as mediators of teacher communication behaviors and student negative emotions. Communication Education, 63(3), 149–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2014.904047

49.

Mercer

Dornyei

(2020). Engaging language learners in contemporary classrooms. Cambridge.

50.

Mottet

T. P.

Frymier

A. B.

Beebe

S. A.

(2006). Theorizing about instructional communication. In Mottet

T. P.

Richmond

V. P.

McCroskey

J. C.

(Eds.), Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives (pp. 255–282). Allyn & Bacon.

51.

Myers

S. A.

(2008). Classroom student-teacher interaction. In Donsbach

(Ed.), The international encyclopedia of communication (pp. 514–520). Blackwell.

52.

Nakai

Koike

Murakami

Takaya

Kotani

Nakai

Suzuki

Aoki

Matsumura

Mandai

(2019). Clinical determinants affecting indications for surgery and chemotherapy in recurrent Ovarian Granulosa Cell Tumor. Healthcare (Basel), 7(4), 145. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare7040145

53.

Pawlak

Zawodniak

Kruk

(2020). Approaching boredom from a theoretical angle. In Pawlak

Zawodniak

Kruk

(Eds.), Boredom in the foreign language classroom: A microperspective (pp. 1–14). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50769-5-1

54.

Pekrun

(2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9

55.

Pekrun

Goetz

Daniels

L. M.

Stupnisky

R. H.

Perry

R. P.

(2010). Boredom in achievement settings: Exploring control–value antecedents and performance outcomes of a neglected emotion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 531–549. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019243

56.

Pekrun

Perry

R. P.

(2014). Control-value theory of achievement emotions. In Pekrun

Linnenbrink-Garcia

(Eds.), International handbook of emotions in education (pp. 120–141). Taylor & Francis.

57.

Peng

J. E.

(2020). Teacher interaction strategies and situated willingness to communicate. ELT Journal, 74(3), 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccaa012

58.

Pishghadam

Derakhshan

Zhaleh

Al-Obaydi

L. H.

(2021). Students’ willingness to attend EFL classes with respect to teachers’ credibility, stroke, and success: A cross-cultural study of Iranian and Iraqi students’ perceptions. Current Psychology, 42(5), 4065–4079. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01738-z

59.

Putwain

D. W.

Becker

Symes

Pekrun

(2018). Reciprocal relations between students’ academic enjoyment, boredom, and achievement over time. Learning and Instruction, 54(2), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.08.004

60.

Qin

(2021). EFL teachers’ immediacy and professional commitment on students’ boredom: A review of literature. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 808311. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.808311

61.

Richmond

(2002). Teacher nonverbal immediacy: Uses and outcomes. In Chesebro

McCroskey

(Eds.), Communion for teachers (pp. 65–80). Allyn and Bacon.

62.

Richmond

V. P.

Gorham

J. S.

McCroskey

J. C.

(1987). The relationship between selected immediacy behaviors and cognitive learning. In McLaughlin

(Ed.), Annals of the international communication association (pp. 574–590). https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1987.11678663

63.

Rodgers

C. R.

Raider-Roth

M. B.

(2006). Presence in teaching. Teachers and Teaching, 12(3), 265–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/13450600500467548

64.

Rugen

(2018). Developing teaching immediacy in language teacher education. The Language Teacher, 42(2), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.37546/jalttlt42.2-2

65.

Segabutla

M. H.

Evans

(2019). Lack of lecturer clarity during instruction: Possible reason for poor throughput? South African Journal of Higher Education, 33(3), 115–131. https://doi.org/10.20853/33-3-2224

66.

Solhi

Derakhshan

Pawlak

Ünsal-Görkemoğlu

(2024). Exploring the interplay between EFL learners’ L2 writing boredom, writing motivation, and boredom coping strategies. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688241239178

67.

Song

(2022). The constructive role of teacher enthusiasm and clarity in reducing Chinese EFL students’ boredom. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 874348. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.874348

68.

Suldo

S. M.

Gormley

M. J.

DuPaul

G. J.

Anderson-Butcher

(2013). The impact of school mental health on student and school-level academic outcomes: Current status of the research and future direction. School Mental Health, 6(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-013-9116-2

69.

Teo

Khazaei

Derakhshan

(2022). Exploring teacher immediacy-(non)dependency in the tutored augmented reality game-assisted flipped classrooms of English for medical purposes comprehension among the Asian students. Computers and Education, 179, 104406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104406

70.

Titsworth

Mazer

J. P.

Goodboy

A. K.

Bolkan

Myers

S. A.

(2015). Two meta-analyses exploring the relationship between teacher clarity and student learning. Communication Education, 64(4), 385–418. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2015.1041998

71.

Tonsing

K. N.

(2018). Instructor immediacy and statistics anxiety in social work undergraduate students. Social Work Education, 37(2), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2017.1395009

72.

Tvedt

M. S.

Bru

Idsoe

(2019). Perceived teacher support and intentions to quit upper secondary school: Direct, and indirect associations via emotional engagement and boredom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(1), 101–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2019.1659401

73.

Velez

J. J.

Cano

(2012). Instructor verbal and nonverbal immediacy and the relationship with student self-efficacy and task value motivation. Journal of Agricultural Education, 53(2), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2012.02087

74.

Violanti

M. T.

Kelly

S. E.

Garland

M. E.

Christen

(2018). Instructor clarity, humor, immediacy, and student learning: Replication and extension. Communication Studies, 69(3), 251–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2018.1466718

75.

Wang

Zhang

L. J.

(2022). Effects of teacher engagement on students’ achievement in an online English as a Foreign Language classroom: The mediating role of autonomous motivation and positive emotions. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(3), Article 950652. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.950652

76.

Wang

(2023). Probing into the boredom of online instruction among Chinese English language teachers during the Covid-19 pandemic. Current Psychology, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-04223-3

77.

Wang

Derakhshan

(2023). Enhancing Chinese and Iranian EFL students’ willingness to attend classes: The role of teacher confirmation and caring. Porta Linguarum, 39(1), 165–192. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi39.23625

78.

Wang

Derakhshan

Pan

(2022). Positioning an agenda on a loving pedagogy in second language acquisition: Conceptualization, practice, and research. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 894190. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.894190

79.

Wang

Y. L.

Derakhshan

Zhang

L. J.

(2021). Researching and practicing positive psychology in second/foreign language learning and teaching: The past, current status and future directions. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 731721. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.731721

80.

Wang

Y. L.

Guan

H. F.

(2020). Exploring demotivation factors of Chinese learners of English as a foreign language based on positive psychology. Revista Argentina de Clinica Psicologica, 29(2), 851–861. https://doi.org/10.24205/03276716.2020.116

81.

Wang

Y. L.

Kruk

(2024). Modeling the interaction between teacher credibility, teacher confirmation, and English major students’ academic engagement: A sequential mixed-methods approach. Studies in Second Language Learning and. Teaching, 142, 235–265. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.38418

82.

Xie

Derakhshan

(2021). A conceptual review of positive teacher interpersonal communication behaviors in the instructional context. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(2), Article 708490. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.708490

83.

Yang

Yin

(2022). Interpersonal projection as EFL teachers’ discourse strategy to enhance students’ willingness to communicate: A systemicfunctional perspective. System, 104, Article 102687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102687

84.

Zawodniak

Kruk

Chumas

(2017). Towards conceptualizing boredom as an emotion in the EFL academic context. Konin Language Studies, 5(4), 425–441. https://doi.org/10.30438/ksj.2017.5.4.3

85.

Zawodniak

Kruk

Pawlak

(2021). Boredom as an aversive emotion experienced by English majors. RELC Journal, 54(1), 22–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220973732

86.

Zheng

(2021). A functional review of research on clarity, immediacy, and credibility of teachers and their impacts on motivation and engagement of students. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(2), Article 712419. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.712419