Modeling Social and Affective Factors in the Writing Process using the PLS-SEM Approach

Writing is a multifaceted process shaped by cognitive, social, and affective dimensions. Although previous research has largely focused on cognitive strategies in writing development, the integrated role of social and affective factors across different stages of the writing process has received comparatively limited attention. This study examines how social and affective factors influence three key stages of the writing process: planning, translating, and reviewing. A quantitative research design was adopted, with data collected from 109 respondents through a questionnaire. The data were analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) with SmartPLS 4, incorporating both measurement and structural model evaluations. The findings reveal that affective factors significantly influence all three stages of the writing process: planning, translating, and reviewing. In contrast, social factors were found to significantly affect only the planning stage, while no significant relationships were identified with the translating and reviewing stages. Effect size analysis indicates that affective factors exert a moderate effect on planning and a strong effect on both translating and reviewing, highlighting the important role of learners’ motivation, confidence, and emotional regulation in writing development. Conversely, social factors demonstrate only a small effect on planning. The predictive relevance assessment further confirms that the model possesses satisfactory predictive capability for the endogenous constructs. Additionally, the Importance–Performance Map Analysis (IPMA) identifies affective factors as critical areas that warrant greater attention in efforts to enhance writing outcomes. Overall, the findings underscore the significance of learners’ emotional engagement in the writing process. The study suggests that educators should foster supportive learning environments that build confidence, reduce writing anxiety, and enhance motivation in writing activities. Future research may further investigate the combined influence of cognitive, social, and affective factors on writing development across diverse educational contexts to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of the writing process.

affective, effect, influence, PLS-SEM, social, writing process

1. Andriani, L., Syihabuddin, Sastromiharjo, A., & Anshori, D. (2022). The Role of Writing Process Components and Cognitive Components in Improving the Quality of Narrative. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 21(12), 88–106. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.12.5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bril, M., Pauw, J., & Lundell, F. F. (2025). Social and Social‐Psychological Factors Do Not Predict L2 Writing: The Case of Immigrants in the Netherlands. International Journal of Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.70006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd Ed). Hillsdale, NJ. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Deb, J. (2018). Affective Factors in Second Language Writing: Is It a Matter of Concern? In Fall (Vol. 46, Number 2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Feng, Z. (2023). View of Meta-cognitive Strategies, Automated Writing Evaluation Feedback and English Writing Performance of Chinese EFL College Students. International Journal of Education and Humanities, 11(3), 483–486. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365–387. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Goodman, S. N. (1999). Toward Evidence-Based Medical Statistics. 2: The Bayes factor. Academia and Clinic, 130(12). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Hair, J. F. Mathews, L. M., Mathews, R. L., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107–123. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed, a Silver Bullet". Journal of Mrketing Theory and Practices, 19(2), 139–152. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hidayah Pratama, N., Laksmi, E. D., Stmik., & Makassar, H. (2018). How Much Do the Affective Factors Contribute to Writing Performance? A Path Analysis Study of Chained Predictors. In Jurnal Pendidikan Humaniora. Vol. 6 (1). http://journal.um.ac.id/index.php/jphpISSN:2338-8110/eISSN:2442-3890 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Huang, Y., & Zhang, L. J. (2022). Facilitating L2 writers’ metacognitive strategy use in argumentative writing using a process-genre approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1036831 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Khezrinejad, M., Rashtchi, M., Seifoori, Z., Candidate, P. D., & Seifoori-Jntell, Z. (2023). Research Paper Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategy Instruction and Their Impact on Iranian EFL Learners’ Writing Cognitive Processes. https://doi.org/10.71528/2024.24011096 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Kurniasih, K., Mukminatien, N., Sari, R. N., Arianto, M. A., Anggraini, M. P., & Umamah, A. (2022). Affective Factors in Online Writing Performance: Do They Matter? MEXTESOL Journal, 46(2), 2–9. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Nisa, S. U., & Wani, N. H. (2024). INVESTIGATING FACTORS INFLUENCING ACADEMIC WRITING SKILLS AMONG FEMALE STUDENTS IN INDIA: A STUDY. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 59(4). https://doi.org/10.35741/issn.0258-2724.59.4.20 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Ramayah, T. Cheak, F., Ting, H., & Memon, M. A. (2018). Partial least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) using Smart PLS 3.0: An Updated Guide and practical guide to statistical analysis (2nd ed). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Raoofi, S., Miri, A., Gharibi, J., & Malaki, B. (2017). Assessing and Validating a Writing Strategy Scale for Undergraduate Students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8(3), 624–633. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Razak, A. S. (2025). Implementation of Cognitive Strategies in Teaching Expository Writing to Tenth-Grade Students at SMA IT Granada Samarinda. Journal of Social Research, 4(9), 1986–1992. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). Gain more insight from your PLS-SEM results: The importance-performance map analysis. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 119(9), 1865–1886. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Shanmugam, B., Chew, F. P., & Ng, L. L. (2023). A Study on the Level of Cognitive Factors, Affective Factors and Writing Performance of Students in Paper 4 of The Malaysian University English Test in Malaysia. International Journal of Humanities, Philosophy and Language, 6(23), 13–29. https://doi.org/10.35631/ijhpl.623002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Stewart, M. K. (2021). Social presence in online writing instruction: Distinguishing between presence, comfort, attitudes, and learning. Computers and Composition, 62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2021.102669 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Ziegenfuss, J. Y., Easterday, C. A., Dinh, J. M., Jaka, M. M., Kottke, T. E., & Canterbury, M. (2021). Impact of demographic survey questions on response rate and measurement: A randomized experiment. Survey Practice, 14(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.29115/sp-2021-0010 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Ownership Structure on Dividend Payout Policy of Listed Plantation Companies in Sri Lanka
• Urban Sustainability in North-East India: A Study through the lens of NER-SDG index
• Performance Assessment of Predictive Forecasting Techniques for Enhancing Hospital Supply Chain Efficiency in Healthcare Logistics
• The Fractured Self in Julian Barnes' Postmodern Fiction: Identity Crisis and Deflation in Metroland and the Sense of an Ending
• Impact of Flood on the Employment, Labour Productivity and Migration of Agricultural Labour in North Bihar