Examining Satisfaction and Self-Confidence as Predictors of Group Interaction in French as a Foreign Language Learning: A PLS-SEM Approach

Collaborative learning is important in higher education because it encourages group interaction, helping students to develop a better understanding as well as academic and social skills. However, the success of group work depends on students’ affective factors, particularly their satisfaction and self-confidence. This study is grounded in Tuckman’s model of group development and Bandura’s Self-Efficacy Theory. It examines how students’ satisfaction and self-confidence influence group interaction. Data were collected from 113 university students through a questionnaire survey, comprising 55 male and 58 female students. The study measured satisfaction, self-confidence, and six aspects of group interaction: goals, roles, team processes, intergroup relations, commitment, and skills. The data were analysed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in SmartPLS 4, conducted in two main stages: the measurement model and the structural model. The results indicate that the measurement model is reliable and valid. Both satisfaction and self-confidence have a significant impact on all aspects of group interaction. Satisfaction has a particularly strong effect on skills and learning, while self-confidence strongly influences roles and skills development. Overall, the findings show that students’ satisfaction and self-confidence are important determinants of effective group work. This study supports the integration of emotional factors in understanding group interaction and demonstrates that PLS-SEM is suitable for this type of research. It also suggests that instructors should design group activities that enhance students’ learning experiences and build their confidence. Furthermore, the results highlight the importance of fostering a supportive learning environment that encourages active participation among students. Future studies may expand the model by incorporating mediating or moderating factors, such as motivation, willingness to communicate, or group size, to better understand how satisfaction and self-confidence influence group dynamics in higher education settings.

Group Interaction, Student Satisfaction, Self-Confidence, Collaborative Learning, PLS-SEM

1. Alzubi, A. A. F., Nazim, M., & Ahmad, J. (2025). Identifying English as a foreign language students’ attitude to improving speaking skills through collaboration. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 19(1), 180-190. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v19i1.21333 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bui, G. (2026). Effects of task interactivity and willingness to communicate on speech fluency in second language learning tasks. RELC Journal, 00336882261422018. DOI: 10.1177/00336882261422018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. De Prada, E., Mareque, M., & Pino-Juste, M. (2024). Self-esteem among university students: How it can be improved through teamwork skills. Education Sciences, 14(1), 108. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14010108 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Campos, J.A.D.B., Zucoloto, M.L., Bonafé, F.S.S., Jordani, P.C. and Maroco, J. (2011). Reliability and Validity of Self-Reported Burnout in College Students: A Cross Randomized Comparison of Paper-and-Pencil vs. Online Administration. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1875-1883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.04.011 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Fornell, C. and Bookstein. F.L. (1982) Two Structural Equation Models: LISREL and PLS Applied to Consumer Exit-Voice Theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 440-452. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3151718 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Goodman, S.N. (1999). Toward evidence-based medical statistics: 2. The Bayes factor. Clinical Trials, 6(3), 229–24 Bayes Factors, 233-240. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-130-12-199906150-00019 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Hair, J. F., Matthews, L. M., Matthews, 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. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1504/ IJMDA. 2017.087624 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Hauf, S., Rickter, N. F., Saretedt, M., Ringle.,C. M. (2024). The Importance and Performance in PLS-SEM. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 78(2024)(100723). https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/109073/1/1- s2.0-S0969698924000195-main.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Martin,H., Craigwell,R. & Ramjarrie,K. (2022) Grit, motivational belief, self-regulated learning (SRL), and academic achievement of civil engineering students, European Journal of Engineering Education, 47:4, 535-557, DOI: 10.1080/03043797.2021.2021861 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Miller,G. (1956) The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some Limits on our capacity for processing information. The Psychological Review,63, 81-97. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning Components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Ramayah, T., Cheah, F. Ting, H., & Memon, M.A. (2018). Partial least Equation Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) using SEM 3.0: An Updated Guide and Practical Guide to Statistical Analysis. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Pearson [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). Using importance-performance matrix analysis (IPMA) in PLS-SEM: Using SmartPLS 3. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3169-3177. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1108/IMDS-10-2015-0449 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Tanaka, M. (2025). Impact of group work environment and size on L2 motivation in project-based learning. System, 130, 103621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103621 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384–399. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022100 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Ziegenfuss, J. Y., Casey A. E., Jennifer M. D., Meghan M. J., Thomas E. K, and Marna, C. (2021) Impact of Demographic Survey Questions on Response Rate and Measurement: A Randomized Experiment. Survey Practice 14 (1), https://doi.org/10.29115/SP-2021- 0010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Bateman,B., Colin Wilson, F., Bingham,D. (2002) Team effectiveness-development of an audit questionnaire. Journal of Management Development, 21(3), 215-226. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Studnicka, K., Zarzycka,D., and Zalewski,J. (2023) Student satisfaction and self-confidence in learning scale (SSCL)—reliability and validity test of the Polish version. Signa Vitae. 2023; 19(5): 104-111. doi: 10.22514/sv.2023.069. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Evaluating the Impacts of Mind Mapping Strategy on Developing EFL Students’ Critical Reading Skills
• Significance of Reading Instructions for Language Improvement in Children with Down Syndrome
• Prenasalised Consonants in Liangmai
• Metadiscourse Matters: Definitions, Models, and Advantages for ESL/ EFL Writing
• Blank Minds and Stuck Voices: Understanding and Addressing Cognitive Anxiety in High-Stakes ESL Speaking Tests