Abstract
Reading engagement is a critical predictor of reading comprehension; yet, many Chinese business English learners exhibit low engagement levels. Existing studies rarely focus on interventions to improve reading engagement. This study developed and evaluated a Reading Boost module grounded in Self-Determination Theory (SDT) that integrates self-assessment, goal-setting, reading skill instruction, authentic materials, and reflection. A mixed-methods explanatory sequential design was employed with 74 second-year Business English majors at a private Chinese college. Quantitative results from ANCOVA revealed significant improvements in emotional, behavioural, and cognitive engagement with differentiated effect sizes across these dimensions. Thematic analysis of interviews revealed concurrent developments across all three dimensions: enhanced motivation, confidence, and interest; increased initiative, sustained effort, and persistence; and the adoption of strategic and metacognitive reading practices. This study demonstrated that the module effectively fostered multidimensional reading engagement. It offers a practical, theory-informed blueprint for designing reading modules that systematically support learner autonomy, competence, and relatedness, highlighting the importance of shifting from instructor-led to learner-facilitated pedagogy in fostering multidimensional engagement.
Plain Language Summary
Many Chinese students learning English as a foreign language (EFL) find it hard to stay interested or focused while reading. This can affect how well they understand English texts. To help improve this, our study created a special “Reading Boost” learning module. This module included several steps: students first evaluated their own reading skills, set personal goals, received lessons on reading strategies, read real-life materials, and reflected on their progress. The module was based on a psychological theory called Self-Determination Theory (SDT), which says that students are more motivated when they feel in control, competent, and connected to others. We tested this module with second-year college students in China using both test results and interviews. The tests showed that students became more emotionally interested in reading, put in more effort, and used better thinking strategies while reading. The interviews confirmed that different parts of the module helped students engage in different ways. This research shows that a carefully designed reading module can help students become more motivated and involved in English reading. It also highlights the important role of teachers in giving students the support they need to become more independent and confident learners. The approach used in this study can help improve how English is taught to students in similar settings.
Keywords
Introduction
Reading engagement, a multidimensional construct encompassing behavioural, emotional, and cognitive components, has been widely recognised as a key factor influencing reading achievement and literacy development. It allows students to process complex texts strategically, expand lexical and grammatical knowledge through repeated exposure, and maintain motivation when facing comprehension difficulties (Guthrie & Klauda, 2014). Consequently, promoting reading engagement has become an essential pedagogical goal in the context of learning English as a foreign language (EFL).
Despite its importance, fostering deep reading engagement remains challenging among Chinese Business English majors. Disengagement is prevalent across all three dimensions: limited interest (emotional), insufficient reading time (behavioural), and a lack of goals and metacognitive strategies (cognitive; N. Chen, 2022; D. Chen & Deng, 2023; Zhang, 2023; Zhou, 2022; Li, 2023). These challenges highlight the need for instructional interventions that address all dimensions of engagement.
Existing interventions, though insightful, have primarily focused on isolated strategies targeting one or two dimensions. For instance, some studies focus on cognitive and behavioural engagement using metacognitive strategies such as self-assessment and goal-setting (Mikami, 2020; Shih & Reynolds, 2018), while others aim to enhance emotional engagement through affective support or optimised content (Ghavamnia & Kashkouli, 2022). However, comprehensive, empirically validated modules for university-level Chinese EFL learners, especially business English majors, remain scarce.
To address this gap, the present study developed the Reading Boost module grounded in Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 2012). The module was designed to foster engagement by integrally satisfying learners’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Specifically, it promotes autonomy through self-assessment, goal-setting, and authentic text selection; builds competence via scaffolded reading strategies and structured, achievable goals; and fosters relatedness by incorporating authentic materials and guided reflection. Accordingly, this study aims to answer the following research questions:
Literature Review
Scholarly conceptualisations of reading engagement consistently frame it as a multidimensional construct, comprising distinct yet interrelated dimensions of emotional, behavioural, and cognitive involvement (Guthrie et al., 2004). An emotionally engaged reader derives pleasure, interest, and confidence from reading; a behaviourally engaged reader demonstrates focused attention, effort, and persistence; and a cognitively engaged reader strategically employs skills such as reflection, comprehension monitoring, and knowledge integration (Guthrie et al., 2004; Tarchi, 2017).
Existing literature reveals a hierarchical and dynamic interplay among engagement dimensions. Emotional engagement, encompassing interest and self-efficacy, serves as a primary driver that fosters cognitive and behavioural involvement (Ronimus et al., 2019, 2022; Zhu et al., 2023). Behavioural engagement, in turn, acts as a key mediator, channelling cognitive strategies into measurable outcomes (Bråten et al., 2022). Thus, the three dimensions are not parallel but function in a synergistic sequence: affect initiates motivation, cognition directs it, and behaviour translates it into results.
The Challenge of Reading Engagement in the Chinese EFL Context
For English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners, cultivating such multidimensional engagement is not only crucial for language acquisition and academic success but also particularly challenging, as it often competes with linguistic barriers, extrinsic motivational structures, and culturally situated learning beliefs. EFL students at Chinese universities, especially Business English majors, often experience disengagement in English reading. Their emotional disengagement is marked by a lack of interest or purpose in reading, often reduced to exam-oriented tasks disconnected from real work situations (N. Chen, 2022; Zhang, 2023). Behaviourally, students tend to restrict their reading to textbooks or turn to online entertainment, neglecting diverse reading opportunities (Zhou, 2022). For instance, a study at a comprehensive key university in China found nearly 50% of students read for less than 30 minutes daily (Zhou & Huang, 2018), while 69% of students at provincial universities do not take notes (Ge, 2021). Additionally, vocational college students reported an even higher rate of 85% (Hou et al., 2020). Cognitive disengagement is also prevalent. For example, 80% of students at key universities lack reading goals (Liu, 2022; Zhou & Huang, 2018), with even higher rates reported in vocational colleges (Duan et al., 2021).
This disengagement stems from traditional teacher-centred, exam-oriented instruction, which undermines autonomy (Ge, 2021). It also diminishes relatedness because reading is treated as a solitary, task-focused and exam-oriented activity, failing to connect learning to socially meaningful contexts (Zhou & Huang, 2018). Besides, the practical, communicative demands of business English challenge learners’ perceived competence, leading to anxiety and disengagement.
The Strategies to Improve Reading Engagement
Prior research has primarily investigated different instructional strategies, which can be categorised into three domains: metacognitive strategies, affective factors, and content and text design.
Metacognitive strategies, including self-assessment, goal-setting, and reflection, foster students’ cognitive and emotional engagement. Self-assessment enables learners to monitor their progress and develop critical thinking (Carroll, 2020; Riswanto et al., 2022; Wicaksono et al., 2023), while goal-setting, particularly when self-directed, enhances persistence and reading focus (Mikami, 2020; Shih & Reynolds, 2018). It also supports self-directed learning (Li et al., 2021; Shih & Reynolds, 2018). Reflection activities promote metacognitive awareness and personal investment in reading, encouraging learners to evaluate strategies and monitor comprehension (Gavell, 2021; Teng, 2020).
Affective factors such as teacher support, reading enjoyment, and self-efficacy contribute significantly to emotional or cognitive engagement. Teacher support—including enthusiasm, adaptive instruction, and engagement stimulation—enhances emotional and cognitive engagement (Li et al., 2025; Jang et al., 2016; Lyu & Hu, 2025; van Hek & Kraaykamp, 2023). Individualised guidance encourages persistence and motivation (Xu et al., 2025).
Content and text design can also promote engagement. For example, Yang et al. (2021) asserted that slightly challenging texts boosted motivation. Cancino and Fonseca (2026) further supported that interesting topics in texts are more likely to boost students’ emotional engagement. Scholars also believe that the inclusion of authentic texts could provide real-world relevance, thereby sustaining efforts and facilitating behavioural engagement (Sari et al., 2020). For instance, Belet Boyacı and Güner (2018) found that authentic materials increased learner motivation. Similarly, Kung (2019) asserted that real-context materials enhance students’ confidence and independence in English reading.
However, most studies have evaluated isolated strategies, focusing on one or two dimensions of reading engagement at a time. This fragmented approach limits our understanding of how to foster engagement in a synergistic manner (Barber & Klauda, 2020). Although coordinated interventions that address multiple dimensions may generate stronger and more sustainable engagement, empirical evidence for such integrated designs remains limited. For example, pairing goal-setting with reflection (Velandia, 2015) or integrating authentic materials with skill instruction (Gavell, 2021)—yet these remain exceptions rather than the norm. As a result, there is a clear gap in the literature: a lack of comprehensive, empirically validated reading interventions that simultaneously support behavioural, emotional, and cognitive engagement, particularly for Chinese university-level Business English learners.
Given this gap, a coherent theoretical framework is needed to guide the design of interventions that can systematically integrate multiple engagement dimensions. The literature points to a motivational explanation. The prevalent lack of goals and superficial reading behaviours suggests insufficient autonomy, with learners viewing reading as an external imposition. The limited use of deeper processing strategies indicates inadequate competence, as students may feel ill-equipped to handle challenging texts. Similarly, emotional disengagement and low interest often reflect weak relatedness, as materials frequently fail to connect to learners’ personal or professional lives. These aligned patterns directly correspond to the core constructs of Self-Determination Theory (SDT), which therefore serves as the theoretical foundation for this study.
Self-Determination Theory
Self-Determination Theory conceptualises engagement as a motivational outcome rooted in the fulfilment of basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2002). In this theory, autonomy refers to the need to perceive oneself as the origin of one’s actions and to engage in behaviours with a sense of volition and reflective endorsement. Competence denotes the need to feel effective in interactions with the social environment and to have opportunities to exercise, develop, and express one’s abilities. Relatedness involves the need to feel connected to others, to care for and be cared for, and to experience a sense of belonging within a social context (Deci & Ryan, 2012; Ryan & Deci, 2002).
The applicability of this theory to language learning has been well established. A growing body of research shows that supporting these three psychological needs promotes sustained engagement and participation in the EFL context (Hakala et al., 2026; Tegmark et al., 2025; H. Wang & Yu, 2025). Extending the basic model, Jang et al. (2016) proposed a dual-process model that highlights the distinct and non-substitutable role of autonomy. Their findings indicate that learners may remain disengaged when autonomy is undermined, even when competence and relatedness are partially supported. This study made a critical theoretical contribution by specifying the non-negotiable role of autonomy within SDT.
While SDT’s principles are universal, their educational implications are highly context-dependent. Therefore, to address the contextual challenge Chinese Business English majors face and translate SDT into pedagogical practice, this study developed the Reading Boost module. It integrates five key components—self-assessment, goal-setting, reading skill instruction, authentic materials, and reflection—deliberately designed to support one or more of the three basic psychological needs proposed by SDT: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. The alignment between module design and psychological needs is illustrated in Figure 1.
Theoretical framework of the Reading Boost module.
Autonomy
The Reading Boost module promotes learner autonomy through four key components: self-assessment, goal-setting, authentic materials, and reflection. Self-assessment is incorporated not merely as a diagnostic tool, but as a foundational act of choice and initiation. When learners identify their own strengths and weaknesses, they are positioned as the origin of their learning path, rather than passive recipients of instruction. This experience of agency is crucial for fulfilling the need for autonomy.
Goal-setting supports autonomy when students define self-concordant objectives—goals that are aligned with their personal interests and reading levels. The process of defining personal goals transforms the module’s requirements into self-chosen pursuits, thereby fostering autonomous over external compliance.
Authentic materials are theorised primarily as an autonomy-supportive intervention. By utilising materials from the learners’ future professional domain (e.g., workplace emails, reports), the module creates identity-relevance. This connection to their emerging professional self imbues the reading task with personal meaning and significance, making it a volitional, self-endorsed activity rather than a decontextualised academic exercise.
Reflection further strengthens autonomy by prompting learners to critically evaluate their progress, adjust strategies, and take responsibility for their learning, promoting sustained self-direction throughout the module.
Competence
The Reading Boost module fosters learners’ sense of competence through goal-setting and strategy instruction. Goal-setting allows learners to establish specific, moderately challenging objectives and experience mastery upon achieving them, which, in turn, enhances their sense of competence (Locke & Latham, 2002).
Explicit instruction is the most direct pathway to building competence. It equips learners with practical tools for skimming, scanning, inferencing, and handling domain-specific vocabulary. This directly reduces anxiety arising from perceived skill gaps and strengthens both actual and perceived competence, enabling deeper cognitive engagement.
Relatedness
The Reading Boost module fosters learners’ sense of relatedness through authentic materials and guided reflection. Authentic materials situate reading within meaningful social and professional contexts, helping learners connect with real-world discourse and envision themselves as part of a future professional community. Guided reflection creates a shared learning space where students can exchange insights, refine strategies, and receive feedback, thereby strengthening their sense of connection and belonging within the classroom.
In summary, the Reading Boost module is not merely a collection of instructional activities but a theoretically grounded design that operationalises the core principles of SDT. By simultaneously supporting autonomy, competence, and relatedness, the module establishes the psychological conditions for sustained emotional, behavioural, and cognitive engagement in reading.
Methods
Research Design
This study adopted a explanatory sequential mixed-methods design (Creswell & Creswell, 2017), integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches to provide a comprehensive understanding of the research problem. The quantitative phase used a quasi-experimental pretest–posttest design, with control and experimental groups assessed before and after the intervention. Comparable intact classes were selected to minimise potential bias in group assignment and enhance the validity of between-group comparisons (Creswell & Clark, 2011).
The qualitative phase aimed to explain and deepen the understanding of the quantitative results. Six participants from the experimental group were purposively selected for semi-structured interviews, consistent with the principles of explanatory sequential designs, where qualitative samples are chosen for their potential to provide rich explanatory insights rather than statistical representativeness (Creswell & Clark, 2011).
Participants and Sampling
The participants comprised two intact classes of second-year Business English majors (aged 19–20) from College G in Guangzhou, China. Due to institutional constraints that precluded random assignment within a single class, a purposive sampling approach was adopted: one class from the main campus served as the experimental group (n = 40), and one from a branch campus served as the control group (n = 34).
This sampling may introduce a potential limitation regarding institutional and contextual differences between the two campuses (e.g., in resources, student culture, or overall learning environment). To strengthen internal validity, two key measures were implemented. First, baseline equivalence was established to confirm the comparability in key demographics and prior English proficiency, ensuring no significant pre-existing differences in the outcome variables. Second, to control for instructor effects, both classes were taught by experienced reading instructors with highly similar educational backgrounds and professional qualifications.
Intervention and Procedure
The intervention was implemented over 8 weeks. The experimental group received the Reading Boost module, while the control group continued with the standard curriculum.
Phase 1: Pre-test and Baseline Data Collection (Week 1). Prior to the intervention, all participants completed a reading engagement survey to establish baseline levels.
Phase 2: Implementation of the Reading Boost Module (Experimental Group Only, Weeks 2–7). The module was integrated into the experimental group’s regular course schedule through weekly 90-min sessions. Its design followed a structured pedagogical sequence intended to systematically foster the three basic psychological needs outlined by SDT: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. This progression, from awareness to action, and finally to integration, ensured that each stage built upon the previous one to maximise reading engagement.
Step 1: Self-assessment based on the Global Scale of English (GSE) Business English Reading descriptors. This initial step was designed to cultivate learner self-awareness and serve as a logical starting point for autonomy. Students assessed their reading proficiency for each learning objective using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree to 7 = Strongly Agree) aligned with GSE descriptors from B1 to B2. As illustrated in Figure 2, students recorded their self-assessed levels for each objective (LO1–LO4), with green cells indicating current proficiency. This structured self-assessment enabled learners to consciously identify their abilities, assume an active role in their learning, and monitor progress throughout the intervention cycle.
Step 2: Goal-setting informed by self-assessment results. This step translated self-awareness into active agency by guiding students to set personalised reading goals based on their initial self-assessment. Goal-setting concretely supported autonomy by offering learners choice and ownership over their learning trajectory, while also initiating competence through the establishment of clear, attainable targets that made progress feel manageable. Operationally, students recorded their target goals (marked in yellow cells in Figure 2) on a personal goal sheet, which was used to visually track their progression from baseline levels to desired outcomes throughout the module.
Step 3: Reading skill instruction and practice. This step focused on systematically building students’ strategic competence to process texts. Students receive face-to-face, explicit instruction on core reading strategies, supplemented by structured online courses targeting higher-level reading skills such as inferencing and evaluating. This step aims to build the toolkit for mastery, directly strengthening competence.
Step 4: Reading of authentic business texts. In this application step, students engaged with carefully selected business texts that matched their proficiency levels and professional interests. This practice served dual purposes: it reinforced relatedness by situating reading within realistic, meaningful contexts connected to their future careers, while simultaneously supporting autonomy by demonstrating the tangible relevance and utility of their learning beyond the classroom.
Step 5: Guided reflection at the end of each session. This is a step for consolidation and social connection. Students use the smiley face (☺) to mark successful goal attainment, as seen in Figure 2. This practise provides immediate, tangible feedback, enhancing competence through recognised accomplishment. The guided prompts also foster a sense of relatedness by encouraging them to share emotional experiences and challenges.
Visual process of self-assessment, goal-setting, and progress tracking.
These five steps follow a sequential logic of a recurring, self-reinforcing cycle: activating autonomy (self-assessment and goal-setting), building competence (providing targeted skills instruction), practical application (authentic texts), and solidification (reflection). This structure enables students to experience continuous progress, with the achievement of goals, indicated by the “smiley face”, providing a visual reward that motivates engagement in the next cycle and sustains a positive feedback loop of ongoing reading engagement.
Phase 3: Data Collection (Week 8) after the intervention. All participants in both groups completed the same engagement survey to assess changes in reading engagement. To complement the quantitative data, semi-structured interviews were conducted with six purposively selected participants from the experimental group, chosen based on their in-class engagement and performance. These interviews were designed to elicit detailed qualitative insights into the learners’ experiences with and perceptions of the module.
Instruments
The quantitative data were collected using the reading engagement scale adopted by Hamedi et al. (2020), which was originally adapted from M.-T. Wang et al. (2016). This scale consisted of six items for each of the three dimensions: cognitive engagement (α = .75), behavioural engagement (α = .81), and emotional engagement (α = .84). To ensure its contextual appropriateness for Chinese Business English learners, the scale underwent translation and back-translation by a bilingual expert. To verify content validity, the translated scale was evaluated by a panel of three experts in English language education and educational psychology. They assessed the relevance, clarity, and comprehensiveness of the items, leading to further refinements based on their feedback. A pilot test with 15 students confirmed the clarity and appropriateness of the final items (see Appendix). The questionnaire was administered via Wenjuanxing, a widely used online survey platform in China.
For the semi-structured interview, six questions were adapted from Nacaroğlu and Bektaş (2023). These questions were translated into Chinese and then modified to reference the Reading Boost module. To ensure linguistic clarity and contextual appropriateness, the questions were validated through expert review and pilot testing prior to administration (see Supplemental Appendix).
Ethical Considerations
This study was conducted in the second semester of the 2024 to 2025 year in accordance with the University’s Human Research Ethics Guidelines and followed the general principles set out by the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Ethical Standards for Research in Education. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the University Research Ethics Committee. The research design minimised potential risks (e.g., survey fatigue) through brief procedures and by ensuring voluntary participation with the right to withdraw without consequence. The societal benefits of participants’ contributions to educational knowledge were judged to outweigh these minimal risks. Prior to participation, all individuals provided written informed consent after reviewing an information sheet detailing the study’s purpose, procedures, and confidentiality measures. All data were anonymised upon collection, and this manuscript contains no identifiable participant information.
Data Analysis
A one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted to answer the first question. ANCOVA was selected as the primary analytical model due to its suitability for the quasi-experimental design with intact groups. By treating pre-test scores as a covariate, ANCOVA statistically adjusted for baseline differences between the experimental and control groups, thereby increasing statistical power and yielding a more precise estimate of the intervention’s effect on post-test outcomes (Mills & Gay, 2019).
Although the use of intact classes introduces a nested data structure (students within classes), a multilevel model was not employed. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) indicated minimal clustering effects, and the research question focused on estimating the overall treatment effect at the student level rather than examining cross-level interactions. Thus, ANCOVA provided a statistically appropriate and interpretable model for detecting the main effect of the intervention after controlling for pre-test performance. Before conducting an ANCOVA, its key assumptions, including normality of residuals, independence of the covariate, and homogeneity of regression slopes, were statistically tested (Field, 2012; Weisberg, 2005).
For the qualitative data, the thematic analysis was conducted following the procedures outlined by Braun and Clarke (2013). Given the small sample size, coding was performed manually. To ensure inter-rater reliability, inter-rater agreement was assessed using Cohen’s Kappa. Two researchers independently coded a subset of transcripts, achieving a Kappa coefficient of 0.85, which reflects substantial agreement.
The qualitative findings were systematically compared with the quantitative results to explain significant outcomes and explore non-significant patterns. This integration clarified the mechanisms behind the intervention’s effects and illuminated learner experiences that extended beyond the quantitative measures.
Results
Assumption Tests
Before examining the main effect of the intervention, the data were assessed for compliance with the three assumptions of ANCOVA. The results, confirming that all assumptions were met, are summarised as follows.
Residual Normality
The histogram of standardised residuals (Figure 3) approximates a symmetrical, bell-shaped normal distribution, providing preliminary visual evidence that the normality assumption is met.
Normality test for ANCOVA assumption.
This Kolmogorov-Smirnov test statistically supports this graph (p = .200; see Table 1). Its non-significant result (p > .05) indicates no substantial deviation from normality (Fisher, 1992). The combination of graphical and statistical evidence supports the assumption of normality.
Normality of Residuals for Reading Engagement.
Note. * This is a lower bound of the true significance (i.e., p > .200, non-significant at α = .05). aLilliefors significance correction.
Independence of the Covariate and Treatment Effect
As shown in Table 2, analysis of pre-test data revealed no significant differences in total engagement (p = .951) or in its emotional (p = .359), behavioural (p = .366), and cognitive (p = .866) engagement scores. This supports the assumption of independence between covariates and treatment.
Independence of the Covariate (Engagement) and Treatment Effect.
The Homogeneity of Regression Slopes
To test the homogeneity of regression slopes, standard multiple regression analysis was used that included interaction terms between the covariate(s) and the group variable. The initial analysis indicated a significant interaction, suggesting a potential violation of this assumption. To further examine this interaction across the covariate’s range, the Johnson-Neyman technique was applied (Johnson, 2016).
As shown in Figure 4, the Johnson–Neyman analysis indicated that the treatment effect remained consistent across the observed range of the covariate, suggesting that the assumption was not practically violated. With all assumptions satisfied, an ANCOVA was conducted to assess the intervention’s effect on reading engagement.
Johnson-Neyman tests of the homogeneity of the regression slopes.
ANCOVA Analysis Results
The one-way ANCOVA revealed significant differences among groups on overall engagement and across its three dimensions. The effect sizes (partial eta squared, η p 2) ranged from medium to large.
Total Engagement
As seen in Table 3, pre-test total engagement significantly predicted post-test total engagement, F = 392.60, p < .001, indicating that pre-existing differences in engagement had a strong effect. After controlling for the covariate, the result revealed a significant main effect of group (F = 68.06, p < .001), suggesting that the intervention had a significant effect on students’ total engagement.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects: Total Engagement.
R Squared = .867 (Adjusted R Squared = .863).
Partial eta squared (η p 2) quantifies effect sizes in the ANCOVA analyses. Values of .01, .06, and .14 represent small, medium, and large effects, respectively (Cohen, 2013). As seen in Table 3, the analysis showed a large effect for total engagement (ηp2 = .49).
Post hoc pairwise comparisons using the Bonferroni correction (Table 4) indicated that participants in the experimental group had significantly higher total engagement scores than those in the control group (MD = 8.50, SE = 1.03, p < .001), with a 95% confidence interval of [6.44, 10.55].
Pairwise Comparisons of Total Engagement.
Based on estimated marginal means
The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.
Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Bonferroni.
Emotional Engagement
As shown in Table 5, the one-way ANCOVA revealed that pre-test scores of emotional engagement had a significant effect on post-test scores. After adjusting for the covariate, the main effect of group (experimental vs. control) remained statistically significant, F = 7.80, p = .007. The partial eta squared (ηp2) = .10, indicating a medium-to-large effect.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects of Emotional Engagement.
R Squared = .54 (Adjusted R Squared = .53).
Post-hoc pairwise comparisons in Table 6 indicated that students in the experimental group demonstrated significantly higher levels of emotional engagement than those in the control group, with a mean difference of 1.8 (p = .007). The 95% confidence interval ranged from 0.515 to 3.09. This 1.8-point increase corresponds to approximately 6% of the total scale or an average increase of 0.3 points per item. This indicates a shift from, for example, “neutral” to “agree” for several items, which is educationally meaningful rather than trivial.
Pairwise Comparisons of Emotional Engagement.
Based on estimated marginal means.
The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.
Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Bonferroni.
Behavioural Engagement
Table 7 shows that pre-test behavioural engagement had a significant effect on post-test behavioural engagement, as the p-value is <.001. After controlling for pre-test behavioural engagement, students’ post-test behavioural engagement showed a significant main effect of group (F = 36.77, p < .001). The ηp2 = .34, larger than 0.14, indicates a large effect size.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects of Behavioural Engagement.
Note. aComputed using Type III sums of squares (SPSS GLM default). R2 = .70 (Adjusted R2 = .69).
Post-hoc pairwise comparisons in Table 8 further demonstrated a significant mean difference between the control and experimental groups (MD = 3.50, p < .001), with participants in the experimental group showing significantly higher behavioural engagement levels than those in the control group. The 95% confidence interval ranged from 2.35 to 4.66. The 3.5 point represents an improvement of approximately 11.7% relative to the scale’s total range, equating to an average gain of 0.58 points per item.
Pairwise Comparisons of Behavioural Engagement.
Based on estimated marginal means.
The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.
Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Bonferroni.
Cognitive Engagement
As shown in Table 9, pre-test cognitive engagement levels significantly predicted post-test cognitive engagement levels (F = 57.79, p < .001). After adjusting for the covariate, cognitive engagement levels in the post-test revealed significant differences among groups (F = 25.26, p < .001). The effect size η p 2(.26), exceeds the conventional threshold for a large effect (.14), indicating a strong treatment impact.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects of Cognitive Engagement.
R Squared = .360 (Adjusted R Squared = .342).
Pairwise comparisons in Table 10 confirmed a significant mean difference between the control and experimental groups, with the experimental group showing an increase of 4.0 points in cognitive engagement (p < .001). The 4.0-point increase in cognitive engagement represents an improvement of approximately 13% relative to the scale’s total range, equating to an average gain of 0.67 points per item. This suggests that the experimental group demonstrated higher cognitive engagement than the control group.
Pairwise Comparisons of Cognitive Engagement.
Based on estimated marginal means.
The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.
Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Bonferroni.
Qualitative Results
Based on the interview data, four themes emerged—students’ positive experiences in emotion, behaviour, and cognition, and the challenges they face. Several subthemes emerged under each theme, as presented in Table 11.
Themes and Sub-Themes Identified.
Emotional Engagement Improvement
Analysis revealed four distinct subthemes, showing that the intervention fostered improvements in students’ emotional engagement, particularly in motivation, sense of responsibility and value, interests, and sense of achievement and confidence. To ensure anonymity, students were assigned pseudonyms in the qualitative analysis (e.g., SA = Student A; SB = Student B).
Self-Awareness Enhances Motivation
Students reported being more motivated after assessing their reading abilities, not simply because they wanted higher scores, but because self-assessment made them more aware of their strengths and weaknesses. This self-awareness encouraged autonomy by prompting students to take ownership of their learning goals and regulate their efforts. As one student noted, “When I set a reading goal, I am more determined in the areas I need to improve” (SA). Similarly, another explained, “Knowing my level made me have the desire to improve” (SB), illustrating how recognising their current level sparked an internally driven desire to act.
Goal-Setting Promotes a Sense of Responsibility and Value
Students reported that choosing their areas of focus and taking responsibility for their progress made them feel accountable for their progress. Achieving these self-set goals further reinforced their sense of competence, generating positive emotional engagement. As one student noted, “When I set a reading goal, I know where I am going and moving forward is my responsibility” (SE), highlighting the connection between self-directed focus and emotional investment. Another student shared, “I feel proud when I finish the set goals” (SC), illustrating how goal attainment contributes to satisfaction and positive affect.
Authentic Texts Increased Interest
Most participants reported that reading authentic business materials (e.g., company profiles, emails, reports) made the reading tasks more meaningful and relevant to real-life use. Students felt more interested and engaged, and less detached from the reading process. For example: “Reading authentic articles helped me feel this is useful in real life, I actually looked forward to reading these texts,” (SF); “It’s interesting to know more about the companies that you are familiar with” (SD). This connection makes students develop a sense of relatedness.
Reflection Fostered a Sense of Achievement and Confidence
By reviewing their learning experiences and progress, students reported a tangible sense of achievement and growing confidence in their reading abilities. For example: “Writing reflections made me see my own progress—I felt proud and more confident” (SC); “Reflecting on my reading achievements encouraged me to keep improving” (SF). This process increased their confidence in their reading competence and sense of achievement, which in turn could foster their autonomy and fuel another cycle of engagement. As one student explained, “When I feel more confident in my reading, I am more willing to keep reading and challenge myself” (SC).
Behavioural Engagement
Three subthemes were identified under this theme, highlighting how students actively managed their reading tasks, maintained effort, and persisted in overcoming challenges.
Initiative Through Self-Assessment
Most students reported that self-assessment encouraged them to take concrete actions to manage their reading tasks. Learners actively completed assigned readings and followed through on planned tasks, demonstrating increased initiative and proactive engagement. For example, one student said, “I completed all the reading exercises for the week after checking my level” (SE), while another shared, “I made sure to finish the extra readings to where I felt my reading skills were lacking” (SD). These behaviours supported autonomy, as students took control of their learning and made independent decisions about how to approach reading activities.
Sustained Effort via Goal-Setting
A recurring pattern among participants was that setting personal reading goals helped them consistently put more effort into completing reading tasks. For example, one student said, “I kept reading regularly because I wanted to reach my reading goal” (SA), while another shared, “Setting clear goals drove me to work harder to complete my reading tasks on time” (SB). This activity enhanced autonomy by transforming the reading from an external requirement into a self-directed pursuit, making the effort feel personally meaningful and self-affirming.
Persistence in Overcoming Challenges
Another recurring pattern showed that students persisted in overcoming challenges when engaging with difficult reading tasks, such as dense authentic texts or complex reflection exercises. For example:“Even when I felt the material was difficult to understand, I still tried to finish the reading” (SE). Another student marked that “reflection made me see how far I had come. The struggle in the process was a sign of growth, and it gave me the patience to push through another chapter” (SF). These accounts show that by persisting through difficulty, students gained tangible proof of their growing competence. They transformed the struggle of reading from an obstacle into a measurable sign of their own progress.
Cognitive Engagement
Four subthemes emerged after the analysis, highlighting the mechanisms through which students planned, processed, elaborated, and adjusted their reading strategies.
Strategic Planning Before Reading
Students consistently demonstrated intentional planning in their approach to reading tasks following self-assessment and goal-setting. For example: “Setting goals helped me focus on the most important parts of the article and plan how to read them” (SA); “After filling out the self-assessment checklist, I noticed I struggled with financial reports, so I focused more on scanning for key information”(SD). These activities fostered autonomy, as learners independently decided which texts to prioritise, how to allocate time, and which strategies to use before starting, highlighting students’ control over how they initiated reading.
Deep Processing While Reading
Participants also reported that explicit instruction in reading strategies (e.g., inference-making, summarisation, and identifying main ideas) encouraged them to actively think about and manipulate text information, demonstrating deeper cognitive engagement. For example, “Learning how to make inferences helped me focus and think more about the meaning behind the text” (SC). While SF reported: “Summarising each section kept me actively involved and made me pay attention to details.” This instruction enhanced competence, as learners felt more capable of controlling their reading process and engaging with challenging materials.
Elaboration by Connecting to Prior Knowledge
Analysis showed that authentic materials enabled students to link new information to prior knowledge and real-world contexts. For example: “I linked the company report to what I’ve learned in class and my part-time job experience, which helped me see the practical use” (SD). Others connected reading directly to future application. For example, “Reading authentic emails made me think about how I would apply it in my future work” (SF). This fostered elaboration and relatedness, enhancing cognitive engagement by encouraging active interpretation, application, and integration of content.
Metacognitive Adjustment After Reading
Participants further reported that reflection exercises enabled them to track their reading process and adjust their strategies after each reading task. For example: “After filling out the reflection checklist, I noticed I struggled with key terminologies, so I should focus more on these professional terms” (SF); “Writing reflections helped me notice where I needed to change my approach” (SC). This process strengthened autonomy and competence, as learners took responsibility for correcting errors, modifying their approaches, and improving their engagement with texts.
In sum, analysis of the interview data showed that the Reading Boost module promoted multidimensional reading engagement not through isolated activities, but through an integrated set of experiences that supported students’ autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Together, these experiences were reflected in students’ emotional responses to reading, their behavioural investment in completing tasks, and their cognitive engagement in planning, processing, and reflecting on texts.
Challenges in Reading Engagement
Despite the overall positive impact of the Reading Boost module, students reported several challenges that affected their emotional, behavioural, and cognitive engagement.
Lack of Short-Term Incentives
A common concern was the lack of short-term incentives, which made it difficult for some students to maintain motivation. For example, “The module could be more motivating if it included an incentive, like extra points for achieving our learning goals.” (SC). “Without any additional rewards or points for completing the reading tasks, it’s hard to stay motivated.” (SA).
Time Management
Students also highlighted time constraints as a significant barrier, as their demanding schedules leave little time for sustained reading. For example: “I feel like there is not enough time, and this reading module requires much time.” (SB). “Our schedule is packed from 8:20 a.m. to 9:30 p.m., I’m really busy” (SD).
Insufficient Guidance on Goal-Setting
Cognitive challenges were also evident, as some students reported difficulty setting specific, manageable reading goals. For example: “Sometimes I don’t know what goals to set.” (SE). “It’s difficult to decide how to plan my reading” (SF).
These findings suggest that while the module promoted engagement, its effectiveness could be further strengthened by addressing motivational support, time management, and guidance on goal setting.
Discussion
The quantitative findings indicate a substantial improvement in students’ overall reading engagement following the intervention, suggesting that the Reading Boost module had a significant impact on how students approached reading tasks.
This overall pattern reflects changes across emotional, behavioural, and cognitive engagement, which are discussed in detail below.
Emotional Engagement Results and Interpretation
Emotional engagement, while improved, demonstrated the smallest effect size among these three dimensions. This indicates a meaningful, though not overwhelming, improvement in the experimental group’s reading motivation and confidence while reducing their frustration. Such a shift in classroom climate can facilitate a more positive and supportive learning environment.
The qualitative findings help explain the observed improvement in emotional engagement by illustrating how students’ affective responses to reading evolved during the intervention. Initially, self-assessment fostered self-awareness, which cultivated intrinsic “motivation,” moving learners from a focus on external rewards towards a personal desire to improve. This motivation was subsequently structured through goal-setting, as students linked personal objectives to “a sense of responsibility” and took pride in their progress. Interest in reading was enhanced, particularly when students engaged with authentic materials that they perceived as relevant to real-life or professional contexts. This relevance reduced feelings of detachment and supported a more positive emotional stance towards reading tasks. Finally, regular reflective practice enabled learners to recognise and internalise their achievements, building confidence and consolidating the affective gains made in earlier stages.
Taken together, the findings suggest that emotional engagement developed through accumulated experiences of self-recognition, relevance, and progress, helping to explain why emotional engagement showed meaningful yet comparatively smaller gains in the quantitative analysis. The internalisation of such engagement inherently requires sustained experience over an extended timeline—a progression that the 8-week module could begin but not complete, particularly within a test-oriented reading culture where such deep affective change may be further protracted (Zhang, 2023).
Behavioural Engagement Results and Interpretation
Behavioural engagement was improved with the largest effect size. In practice, this indicates that students demonstrated greater focus and persistence in reading assignments, consistently completing tasks, and maintaining effort even when texts became difficult. They were less easily distracted and more self-directed, indicating a shift from passive participation to engaged active learners.
The subthemes of “initiative through self-assessment,”“sustained effort via goal-setting,” and “persistence in overcoming challenges” provide insight into why behavioural engagement demonstrated the largest effect size in the quantitative analysis. Students’ accounts indicate that self-assessment functioned as a trigger for initiative, prompting learners to take more active responsibility for managing their reading tasks rather than engaging in passive completion.
Goal-setting further translated this initiative into sustained effort, as students described maintaining consistent engagement over time in order to meet their self-defined targets. Importantly, persistence emerged most clearly when students encountered challenging texts. Rather than disengaging, learners framed difficulty as part of the learning process and continued working through demanding material.
Together, these results suggest that behavioural engagement was particularly responsive to the module’s structured and task-oriented design. Because the intervention required visible actions, such as completing readings, monitoring progress, and persisting through difficulty, students were able to demonstrate immediate and observable behavioural change. In contrast to cognitive and emotional engagement, which depend more heavily on internal processing and gradual affective development, behavioural engagement could manifest more rapidly within the intervention period, helping to explain its comparatively larger effect size.
Cognitive Engagement Results and Interpretation
The significant improvement in cognitive engagement suggests that they applied more effective cognitive strategies, such as making inferences, setting personal learning goals, reflecting on their learning, and monitoring the reading process.
The qualitative data shed light on how cognitive engagement developed during the intervention and help explain the quantitative pattern observed for this dimension. Students’ accounts consistently highlighted “strategic planning before reading” as a central entry point into more active cognitive engagement. By setting goals and clarifying reading focus in advance, learners established a cognitive anchor that shaped how they approached texts, moving away from passive reading towards more intentional processing.
This planning appeared to support “deep processing while reading,” as students described monitoring comprehension and engaging more deliberately with complex information. Many accounts further pointed to “elaboration by connecting to prior knowledge,” particularly when learners linked new content to familiar business contexts or previously learned concepts.
Importantly, “metacognitive adjustment after reading” emerged as a key mechanism through which cognitive engagement was sustained across tasks. Students reported reflecting on difficulties encountered and modifying strategies for subsequent readings, suggesting that post-reading evaluation transformed reading experiences into actionable feedback. This recursive process indicates the development of a self-regulated reading cycle, in which planning, processing, elaboration, and adjustment mutually reinforce one another.
It is noteworthy that cognitive engagement demonstrated the greatest mean increase, yet a smaller effect size than behavioural engagement. This pattern indicates heterogeneity in the depth of strategy internalisation among students. Such variability underscores that cognitive engagement is a higher-order, metacognitive construct whose development is inherently more individualised and less uniform than observable behavioural change.
In general, these findings corroborate existing literature on key drivers of engagement, confirming the roles of personalised instruction (Xu et al., 2025), scaffolded strategy instruction such as goal-setting (Mikami, 2020; Shih & Reynolds, 2018), reflection (Teng, 2020), and authentic materials (Kung, 2019; Sari et al., 2020). Unlike previous studies, the present research demonstrates the synergistic effect of integrating these components into a unified module specifically for Chinese Business English learners. It further elucidates how the intrinsic linkages among these components provide an effective pathway for enhancing learners’ overall and multi-dimensional engagement in this particular context.
Integration of Data
This study employed an explanatory sequential design. The qualitative phase was explicitly conducted to elucidate the initial quantitative results. This integration reveals that the qualitative data did not merely confirm the quantitative patterns but provided the explanatory depth necessary to understand the differential development across engagement dimensions.
The quantitative data established a clear hierarchy: behavioural engagement demonstrated the largest effect size, followed by cognitive engagement, with emotional engagement exhibiting a comparatively small effect size. For emotional engagement, narratives of developing pride and interest confirmed the positive shift while framing it as a nascent, gradual process, thereby explaining its more moderate quantitative trajectory. For behavioural engagement, students’ increased initiative and persistence explained the large effect size as the most direct and observable outcome of the module’s structured routines. For cognitive engagement, descriptions of varied depth in strategy internalisation clarified why its mean gain was high yet its effect size was smaller, highlighting heterogeneity in mastering complex processes.
Meanwhile, the convergence of quantitative and qualitative evidence affirms that reading engagement is a dynamic system rather than a collection of isolated components, aligning with previous studies (Bråten et al., 2022; Ronimus et al., 2019; Zhu et al., 2023).
While prior models often posit a hierarchical or sequentially mediated relationship, typically with emotional engagement as an antecedent. In this study, students consistently described emotional responses (e.g., pride, confidence) not merely as precursors, but as direct outcomes of successful behavioural and cognitive acts, such as achieving a self-set goal. Simultaneously, these positive affective states were reported to energise subsequent behavioural persistence and cognitive focus. This suggests a bidirectional, reinforcing loop rather than a unidirectional or strictly mediated pathway.
Theoretical Interpretation: A Self-Determination Theory Perspective
The differential yet interconnected development across engagement dimensions could be interpreted through the lens of self-determination theory. The observed pattern points directly to the synergistic, yet differentially experienced, fulfilment of the core psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Importantly, engagement is not driven solely by each need in isolation; rather, it emerges from their dynamic interaction, particularly the synergy between autonomy and competence (Ryan & Deci, 2017).
SDT Needs in Reading Engagement
Autonomy, competence, and relatedness each contributed uniquely to reading engagement. Autonomy functioned as the initial driver of engagement by giving learners a sense of control over their reading process. When students could make choices about their learning—such as setting personal goals and evaluating their strengths and weaknesses—they were more motivated to invest effort and regulate their reading behaviours. This perceived control encouraged strategic planning, persistence in challenging tasks, and active cognitive processing, ultimately fostering both behavioural and cognitive engagement (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009), explaining the large effect size of behavioural and cognitive engagement in the findings.
Competence reinforced engagement by enabling learners to experience mastery and build confidence in their reading abilities. The module supported competence through explicit strategy instruction, clear performance expectations, and gradually increasing task difficulty, allowing students to achieve incremental progress and visibly track their improvement. These mastery experiences strengthened persistence and self-regulated behaviours, stabilising both behavioural and cognitive engagement. Over time, the successful experience enhanced learners’ confidence and self-efficacy, which supported the gradual development of emotional engagement. This dynamic illustrates how competence functions as a reinforcing mechanism across multiple dimensions of reading engagement.
Relatedness served as an affective buffer that reduced anxiety and enhanced resilience in demanding reading contexts. The use of authentic materials and guided reflection helped students perceive reading as meaningful and socially relevant, making the activity personally valuable rather than externally imposed. This process of value-laden internalisation is what directly reinforced persistence and nurtured deeper emotional engagement (Furrer & Skinner, 2003).
Dynamic Interplay and Synergistic Mechanisms of Psychological Needs
Each psychological need not only supported specific aspects of engagement in different ways, but they also interacted dynamically. This synergy contributed to sustained emotional, behavioural, and cognitive engagement.
Autonomy served as the initial spark, prompting students to set goals, plan strategically, and take ownership of their learning. This volitional effort created opportunities for successful experiences, which activated competence: as learners achieved incremental mastery through scaffolded strategies and attainable goals, their perceptions of capability strengthened. Importantly, competence did not act in isolation—it fed back into autonomy: experiencing mastery reinforced learners’ confidence in their ability to direct their own learning, motivating further autonomous action.
Relatedness functioned both as a social context and a reinforcing amplifier for meaning and internalisation. By situating reading tasks in meaningful contexts, it made sustained effort personally worthwhile. This sense of connection directly supported autonomy by increasing learners’ persistence. Critically, relatedness also transformed the experience of competence. Mastery achieved within a relevant social or professional context was not merely an academic success; it became emotionally resonant and personally significant. Thus, relatedness did not act in isolation but amplified and gave personal meaning to the outcomes of autonomous action and competent mastery.
Together, these elements formed a self-reinforcing cycle: autonomy initiated the effort, competence provided the rewarding feedback for autonomy, while relatedness provided the meaningful context necessary for those experiences to be internalised. Each success strengthened future autonomous action, each autonomous step opened new paths to mastery, and the sense of relevance made these experiences personally significant—thereby sustaining behavioural, cognitive, and emotional engagement over time.
Aligning with Jang et al. (2016), who emphasised the importance of autonomy support, the present study extends this perspective by demonstrating that the dynamic interaction among autonomy, competence, and relatedness is essential. It forms a synergistic mechanism that sustains behavioural, cognitive, and emotional engagement, with differential pathways and timelines across dimensions. Therefore, effective instructional design should systematically integrate support for all three psychological needs.
Implication and Limitations
Theoretically, this study contributes to the SDT literature by elucidating the dynamic interplay between psychological needs in an EFL reading context. It provided evidence for a synergistic model where autonomy and competence support function as a mechanism for engagement initiation and maintenance. Meanwhile, relatedness may operate on a different pathway, providing the meaningful context that frames learning experiences, allowing autonomy and competence to be exercised effectively. This differentiated yet interactive view of psychological needs offers a more nuanced theoretical lens for future research examining how need satisfaction unfolds and interacts over time.
While these findings are promising, there are several limitations. First, the intervention lasted only 8 weeks, which may not have been sufficient to fully capture the long-term development of emotional engagement. Second, although the findings provided valuable insights into how the module contributed to emotional, behavioural, and cognitive engagement, the current study design did not allow for the isolation and quantification of the independent effects of each component. Future research employing dismantling or factorial designs is needed to determine the specific impact of individual components. Moreover, the intervention was designed for Business English majors; the applicability of the module to learners in other disciplines remains uncertain and needs further investigation.
Conclusion
This study demonstrates the effectiveness of a Self-Determination Theory-based module in significantly enhancing reading engagement among Chinese EFL learners across emotion, behaviour, and cognition. By systematically addressing students’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, the intervention fostered greater motivation and positive learning experiences, strengthened persistence and active participation, and promoted more strategic and in-depth text processing of texts.
The findings have two key practical implications. For curriculum designers and resource developers, the module offers a blueprint for creating structured, autonomy-supportive reading interventions that simultaneously foster learners’ sense of competence and relatedness. And for classroom practitioners and instructors, the findings highlight the value of shifting instructional roles from controlling to facilitating learning. This entails modelling and scaffolding self-regulated learning strategies to support autonomy and competence, while consciously designing activities that connect reading content to students’ identities and future goals to build relatedness.
Future work could conduct longer-term studies to examine the sustainability of engagement gains, employing dismantling or factorial designs to determine the specific contributions of individual components, and testing the module across different learner populations and disciplinary contexts. Such investigations would refine our understanding of how modular, autonomy-supportive reading interventions can be adapted and scaled to maximise engagement and learning outcomes.
Supplemental Material
sj-docx-1-sgo-10.1177_21582440261431382 – Supplemental material for Boosting EFL Learners’ Reading Engagement via a Structured Reading Module: Insights From a Chinese Context
Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-sgo-10.1177_21582440261431382 for Boosting EFL Learners’ Reading Engagement via a Structured Reading Module: Insights From a Chinese Context by Aihua Zhu, Samah Ali Mohsen Mofreh, Sultan Salem and Mao Yao in SAGE Open
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
We appreciate the constructive comments from the reviewers and editors, which significantly improved the manuscript.
Ethical Considerations
This study was conducted in accordance with relevant ethical guidelines. All participants provided informed consent. The study protocol was approved by the Jawatankuasa Etika Penyelidikan Manusia Universiti Sains Malaysia (JEPeM-USM): USM/JEPeM/PP/24040350.
Consent to Participate
Ethical approval for this study was obtained from Universiti Sains Malaysia Research Ethics Committee. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants involved in the study.
Author Contributions
Aihua Zhu: Led the research design, coordinated activities, and wrote the manuscript.Samah Ali Mohsen Mofreh: Contributed to research design and methodology.Sultan Salem: Contributed to the methodology, language editing, and polishing of this article. MaoYao: Helped collect data.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Guangzhou College of Technology and Business (Projects Code: KCSZ2024241596; JXGG202523). The funding was obtained after the initial submission and provided support for additional analyses and manuscript revision. The funders had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing of the manuscript.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Data are not publicly available due to privacy or other restrictions. Requests for data access should be directed to
Supplemental Material
Supplemental material for this article is available online.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
