The DOI matches its Crossref record; 108 of the 108 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
I believe, therefore I achieve (and vice versa): A meta-analytic cross-lagged panel analysis of self-efficacy and academic performance
Open accessAbstract
Self-efficacy has long been viewed as an important determinant of academic performance. A counter-position is that self-efficacy is merely a reflection of past performance. Research in the area is limited by unidirectional designs which cannot address reciprocity or the comparative strength of directional effects. This systematic review and meta-analysis considered both directions of the relationship simultaneously, pooling data from longitudinal studies measuring both academic self-efficacy and academic performance over two waves. Pooled correlations (k = 11, N = 2688) were subjected to cross-lagged path analysis that provided support for a reciprocal effects model. Performance had a net positive effect on subsequent self-efficacy (β = 0.205, p < 0.001), significantly larger than the effect of self-efficacy on performance (β = 0.071, p < 0.001). Moderator analyses indicated that reciprocity holds for adults, but not for children (in whom performance uniquely impacts subsequent self-efficacy beliefs, but not the reverse). Cross-lagged effects were stronger in studies which used methodologies consistent with recommendations of self-efficacy theorists.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1989.10488618 · Cited by 99,167
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(1990) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,269
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control
Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999) · Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy · doi:10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158 · Cited by 46,835
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 · Cited by 43,925
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & the PRISMA Group* (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · Cited by 37,554
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series
(2008) · doi:10.1002/9780470712184 · Cited by 25,048
Self-efficacy: the exercise of control
(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.35-1826 · Cited by 24,281
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry
Flavell, J. H. (1979) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.34.10.906 · Cited by 11,282
Cited by
The Emotion Process: Event Appraisal and Component Differentiation
Scherer, K. R., & Moors, A. (2019) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011854 · Cited by 688
Does ChatGPT enhance student learning? A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies
Deng, R., Jiang, M., Yu, X., Lu, Y., & Liu, S. (2025) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105224 · Cited by 531
Is high self-esteem beneficial? Revisiting a classic question.
Orth, U., & Robins, R. W. (2022) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/amp0000922 · Cited by 393
Changing Behavior Using the Model of Action Phases
Keller, L., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2020) · The Handbook of Behavior Change · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.006 · Cited by 147
Work Experiences and Self-Esteem Development: A Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies
Krauss, S., & Orth, U. (2022) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1177/08902070211027142 · Cited by 92
Metadata
- Authors
- Talsma, K., Schüz, B., Schwarzer, R., & Norris, K.
- Venue
- Learning and Individual Differences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-01
- Volume
- 61
- Pages
- 136-150
- ISSN
- 1041-6080 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2774840496
- Cited by
- 445
- References
- 108
- FWCI
- 38.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: I believe, therefore I achieve (and vice versa): A meta-analytic cross-lagged panel analysis of self-efficacy and academic performance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.11.015
- The paper
- Talsma, K., Schüz, B., Schwarzer, R., & Norris, K. (2018). I believe, therefore I achieve (and vice versa): A meta-analytic cross-lagged panel analysis of self-efficacy and academic performance. Learning and Individual Differences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.11.015
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.