The particular dialect or language that a person chooses to use on any occasion is called a code 2756 Copyright © 2024 The Author IDEAS is licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0 License Issued by English study program of IAIN Palopo IDEAS Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) Volume 12, Number 2, December 2024 pp. 2756 - 2776 The Interplay of Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy on English Learning Outcomes of EFL Learners: A Meta-Analysis Lailul Fitriah1, Mujiono2, Riza Weganofa3 E-mail: lailulfitriah0510@gmail.com1, moejie_nova@unikama.ac.id2, rizaweganofa@unikama.ac.id3 1,2,3English Education Department, Universitas PGRI Kanjuruhan Malang Received: 2024-11-19 Accepted:2024-12-31 DOI: 10.2456/ideas. v12i2.5849 Abstract This study investigates how learning motivation (LM) and self-efficacy (SE) interact to influence English learning outcomes for EFL learners, addressing the critical need for an evidence-based understanding of these relationships through a meta-analysis. LM and SE have significantly related to EFL learners’ learning outcomes. However, there is a need to thoroughly examine learning outcomes in language learning, particularly considering variations in students’ LM. This study uniquely synthesizes findings from various correlation studies, employing a meta-analytical approach to confirm the relationship between LM and SE and explore the moderating effects of contextual factors such as educational level and instrument types, which have been largely overlooked in previous research. The evidence for the relationship between LM and SE in EFL students was analyzed using a meta-analysis. The study found that a random model was utilized, and the magnitude of the effect was exceptionally great (d.0576). The meta-analysis computed 11 effects, and the variable analysis moderator examined the study's source, sample size, student major, language learning target, educational level, and instrument type. Keywords: Learning Motivation, Self-efficacy, Learning outcomes, EFL Introduction The skills, knowledge, attitudes, and values students acquire are learning outcomes from their learning experiences. Measurable changes in behavior and understanding typically manifest after students engage in structured learning activities (Khoirunikmah et al., 2023; Schneider & Preckel, 2017). Several factors contribute to improved learning outcomes for students, particularly EFL learners, http://u.lipi.go.id/1457703302 https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=57214727131 mailto:%20E-mail:%20lailulfitriah0510@gmail.com1 mailto:moejie_nova@unikama.ac.id2 mailto:rizaweganofa@unikama.ac.id3 IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2757 including internal and external factors. Learning style, social skills, cognitive ability, learning attitude, and internal factors that influence learning outcomes include LM and SE, especially of EFL learners (Ancheta & Bocar, 2024; Ekowati, 2019; Haibar & Yuzarion, 2024; Khoirunikmah et al., 2023; Long & Tuyen, 2020; Wijaya & Bukhori, 2017). Meanwhile, external factors can include the school environment, teaching methods, attitudes, and student social support (Ancheta & Bocar, 2024; Ekowati, 2019). Indeed, these two factors can influence students' learning outcomes, but this research focuses on motivational factors and SE about the learning outcomes of EFL learners. Motivation is essential as a timer and task selection and can regulate the energy used in a particular task (Bakar, 2014; Haj & Benhima, 2024). An individual’s behavior towards change is driven by various tendencies that vary in frequency and intensity (Baumeister, 2016; Zheng et al., 2018). Furthermore, LM indicates students' learning outcomes in a foreign or second language, particularly for English learners (Gardner, 2001 an; Khodadad & Kaur, 2016). However, what often happens and is a significant problem is maintaining motivation over a more extended period, especially when facing challenges or tasks; this can be intrinsic or extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation comes from a high level of internal control and is fueled by personal interests that inspire individuals to carry out activities inside themselves, whereas extrinsic motivation comes from external influences (Engidaw, 2021; Pintrich, 2003). In addition, motivation is a significant aspect of encouraging individuals to develop, as well as self-efficacy, which is an aspect of achieving learning goals, high self-efficacy will produce motivation to succeed in learning activities because individuals with high SE will be more confident in their abilities to perform tasks (Aprianto et al., 2024; Farihah & Rakasiwi, 2020). Students with a strong sense of SE are more likely to be motivated to learn and fulfill their learning objectives. Additionally, each person's long-term interests and personality traits influence sustainability (Filgona et al., 2020; Odabas, 2022). In contrast, students with low SE often avoid complex and challenging educational tasks (Shin, 2018; Tang et al., 2022). In this case, the function of motivation in English language learning can influence learning persistence; it is commonly recognized that highly motivated students have high levels of success in language acquisition (Do rnyei, 1998; Xue, 2021). Conversely, students who have low achievement, especially those who learn English, result from low motivation (Riyanti, 2019). This is often an obstacle for teachers, so teachers can encourage students' motivation to learn English in various ways using motivational strategies (Do rnyei, 2021 in Riyanti, 2019). Lailul Fitriah, Mujiono, Riza Weganofa The Interplay of Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy on English Learning Outcomes of EFL Learners: A Meta-Analysis 2758 Individuals with solid beliefs and desires so they can overcome challenges in achieving goals and are more motivated to act usually have high self-efficacy (Lestari et al., 2020; Zhang & Li, 2021). Bandura (1997) stated that SE beliefs are vital in defining individual motivation and behavior (Bandura, 1997). SE has a subnational effect on learners’ academic achievement and also drives them to succeed in meeting expected learning objectives. SE is a person's belief in their ability to attain goals or accomplishments, such as learning English. Odabas (2022) indicated that learners with more robust SE are more driven to learn, making it more straightforward to succeed when learning English, especially as a foreign language. Students with high SE are more likely to be confident and motivated to learn despite challenges in the learning process. Students with low efficacy tend to have no confidence due to fear of difficulties in learning (Moghari et al., 2011). In general, SE refers to a person's belief in their ability to reach a level of performance that is a determinant of essential occurrences in their life (Bandura, 1994 in Odabas, 2022). SE is divided into three connected dimensions: on the level of task difficulty that an individual believes is achievable, this is referred to as magnitude; power refers to whether beliefs about magnitude are strong or weak, while generality is the extent to which expectation held by the individual are generalized across different situations (Bandura, 1977a in Gist, 1987). In learning English, SE has a vital role as it can affect students' motivation, perseverance, and overall success in completing tasks and can improve overall academic performance in learning English (A. Aladini & Abu Owda, 2020; Rodliyah & Khoirunnisa, 2023). The relevance of SE can improve academic accomplishment, confidence in language abilities, and academic success (Dan et al., 2022). In general, it has been demonstrated that motivation and SE can boost an individual's desire to learn, particularly while learning English. There is a correlation between LM and self-efficacy (Gahemi & Damirchiloo, 2015). Furthermore, people with high motivation and SE might have a greater desire to attain a goal, specifically in language acquisition, because learners will be more confident in their abilities. In other words, students will perceive challenges as opportunities to learn and grow in EFL learning (Gan et al., 2023; Han & Lu, 2017; Khodadad & Kaur, 2016). Several studies have found that learning motivation affects learning outcomes. LM can increase student satisfaction and performance in learning; learning motivation can also improve learning outcomes by encouraging students to try harder and overcome difficulties in the learning process. Besides that, it can provide a higher level of student involvement in the learning process and an easier understanding of better material can improve their learning outcomes (Ersanlı, 2015; Peng & Fu, 2021; Ulfa & Bania, 2019; Wallace & Leong, 2020). In addition, the effect of SE can be felt in the long term by the students such as SE becomes a vital role as motivation, perseverance increases, resilience contributes to better learning outcomes, and a willingness to take on complex tasks IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2759 (Genç et al., 2016; Mujiono, 2024; Yusof et al., 2021). Despite extensive research on motivation and self-efficacy in EFL contexts, previous studies lack a comprehensive synthesis using meta-analytical methods to integrate and quantify these relationships. This gap restricts the ability to develop robust pedagogical strategies to optimize EFL learners' motivation, self-efficacy, and learning outcomes. This meta-analysis contributes to English language learning by systematically synthesizing existing research to provide teachers and policymakers with actionable insights on enhancing LM and SE, which are critical for improving EFL learners' engagement and academic performance and building on prior findings that emphasize the individual roles of learning motivation and self-efficacy in shaping EFL learners' outcomes. This study integrates these variables through a meta-analytical approach to address the question: Is there a relationship between learning motivation and self- efficacy on learning outcomes, mainly when moderated by specific contextual variables? In this research, the researcher hypothesized that (1) there is a relationship between LM and SE on learning outcomes with the addition of a moderator. Methods Although this study utilized the meta-analysis technique compliant with PRISMA guidelines, potential limitations include variability in study methodologies, cultural differences across included studies, and the limited sample size in some cases, which may affect the generalizability of the findings (Liberati et al., 2009). Study the Eligibility Criteria This meta-analysis examined research involving English as a foreign language learner across various age groups. Data extraction entailed searching in defined databases for studies that met inclusion and exclusion criteria for peer-reviewed studies published from 2013 to 2024. The studies were assessed for quality based on predetermined criteria such as clarity, mission of research, appropriateness of methodology, and trustworthiness of instruments, so only high-quality data were included in the analysis. Data Source The literature search involved databases such as ERIC, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Taylor & Francis, using specific keywords including 'intrinsic motivation,' 'self- efficacy in learning,' 'English language learning outcomes,' and their combinations to ensure comprehensive retrieval of relevant studies. Lailul Fitriah, Mujiono, Riza Weganofa The Interplay of Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy on English Learning Outcomes of EFL Learners: A Meta-Analysis 2760 Effect Size Calculation The primary outcome of this study is the effect size (ES) of the standardized mean difference, which was estimated using the mean and standard deviation (Borenstein et al., 2009). The researchers investigated the overall ES individually, and a high ES suggests increased motivation and SE, whereas a negative ES indicates a reduction in these factors. A random effects model conformed to the guidelines for gathering ES (Borenstein et al., 2009). Analysis in this study used OpenMEE as a tool. Heterogeneity and Small-Study Effect Cochran's Q test was used to quantify heterogeneity, while inconsistency used the l2 statistic (Borenstein et al., 2009, 2017). Values in the 25% range are regarded as low, 50% are considered medium, and 75% are considered high or represent a large amount of inconsistency developed, suggesting using the funnel plot and Egger's regression test (Sedgwick & Marston, 2015). These methods ensure a balanced interpretation of results by identifying asymmetry and overestimation in the included studies. Study Selection Figure 1. Flowchart of the studies selection. IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2761 This meta-analysis covered eleven studies conducted between 2013 and 2024. They were selected based on stringent inclusion criteria, such as sufficient data to calculate effect size, using correlation research methods and focusing on LM, SE, and English learning outcomes. Figure 1 depicts a research process flowchart; electronic databases, likely ERIC, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Taylor & Francis, were used to search the literature. Separate search terms were used to search for LM, SE, and English achievement. The authors obtained 498 ERIC articles, 1,058 Google Scholar articles, 189 SCOPUS, and 591 Taylor & Francis. In addition, as shown in Figure 1, the researcher found 52 articles from other sources. The publication of the findings was limited to 2013 and 2024. Inclusion and Exclusion Rules A search in the database yielded 2,388 studies. The first screening yielded 1,511 studies relevant to the study. The inclusion criteria required studies to provide sufficient data for effect size computation, employ correlation research methods published between 2013 and 2024, specifically address learning motivation and self-efficacy in EFL contexts, and utilize standardized or validated measures for the constructs under investigation, so 96 were kept for further research and coding. Figure 1 shows that the meta-analysis looked at 11 studies. Table 1. List of Selected Studies with Moderator Factors Author N r ES Study’s source Sample size Student major Target language learning Types of Instruments Educational level Geographic Region Alieto Aricson & Torres Joel Mayo, 2019 160 0.514 0.568 Article Large Non- English General English Standardized Instrument Senior High School Southeast Asia Aprianto Dedi, et al,. 2024 71 0.680 0.829 Journal Medium Non- English General English Custom Instrument Collage Southeast Asia Celcima, D,. et al.,. 2024 85 0.580 0.662 Journal Medium Non- English General English Custom Instrument Collage Southeast Europe Cheng Chang, Y & Ting Tsai, Y, 2022 450 0.187 0.189 Article Large Non- English General English Standardized Instrument Collage Southeast Asia Fatemi 93 0.39 0.412 Journal Medium English General Standardized Collage Western Lailul Fitriah, Mujiono, Riza Weganofa The Interplay of Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy on English Learning Outcomes of EFL Learners: A Meta-Analysis 2762 Moderators Variables Table 1 listed six factors that could function as moderators and likely sources of the study: sample size, major of students, target language learning, level of education, and type of instruments. Researchers also stated that the concentration on their students as English or non-English, English in general, and writing are the focus areas for learning. Two categories are used in instruments: (1) standard instruments and (2) customized instruments. Then, this analysis utilized meta- regression using OpenMEE. Data Analysis Meta-Analysis Utilizes This study utilized confidence intervals (CI) and funnel plots to examine the heterogeneity of effect sizes and publication bias (Peters et al., 2010). Publication Bias If the value at risk of bias is above 50%, then there is a significant factor. This is usually due to publication bias, which means overestimating the effect or possibly not showing any effect (Van Aert et al., 2019). Hosseini, A, & Vahidnia F. 2013 English Instrument Asia Khatimah, Z.H, et al,. 2023 34 0.834 1.201 Article Small Non- English General English Custom Instrument Senior High School Southeast Asia Nunez, M. R, 2022 26 0.615 0.717 Article Small Non- English General English Standardized Instrument Senior High School Southeast Asia Sabti, Ahmed. A., et al., 2019 100 0.785 1.058 Article Medium English Writing Standardized Instrument Collage West Asia Sahril & Weda Sukardi, 2020 50 0.057 0.057 Article Small English Writing Custom Instrument Collage Southeast Asia Wu Xia et al., 2022 223 0.361 0.378 Journal Large Non- English General English Custom Instrument Collage East Asia Zaid Hassan, 2020 179 0.34 0.354 Article Large Non- English General English Custom Instrument Collage North Africa IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2763 Moderator Analysis A selection of variables was considered for the study as moderators: source, sample size, student major, target language learning, educational level, and instruments. These variables were meant to investigate their effects on LM and SE outcomes among EFL learners. They were mainly chosen as variables of interest because they often appeared in earlier meta-analyses and also were pertinent for understanding the different contexts related to English language learning, giving a better breadth of coverage for possible influence on the measured findings. These factors are collected using categorical variables and included in data collection, analysis, and conclusions. Results Heterogeneity and Small-Study Effects Figure 2 shows the average heterogeneity test and adjusted variance for 11 different effect sizes, with an I2 value of 87.437 percent and a Q (df=10) of 79.598. This indicates that the level of heterogeneity is so high that the study continued using a completely random effect model investigation. The significant cumulative mean effect size (d = 0.576) determines the relationship between LM and SE on learning outcomes to be moderate to strong, with a 95% confidence interval consistent across studies. This holds that both factors are instrumental in determining academic success among EFL learners. The substantial mean effect size ( d = 0.576, 95% CI: 0.402 – 0.750) suggests a moderately strong relationship between LM, SE, and learning outcomes, with the confidence interval highlighting the range of likely population effects. Figure 2. Forest Plot of Effect Sizes for LM Studies Lailul Fitriah, Mujiono, Riza Weganofa The Interplay of Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy on English Learning Outcomes of EFL Learners: A Meta-Analysis 2764 Figure 3. Forest Plot of Effect Sizes for SE Studies In the forest plot above, the horizontal lines on each square show each study’s ES, while the black boxes 95 percent represent confidence intervals. The vertical line in the middle has no effect. Furthermore, the forest plot in Figure 2 has an overall impact of 0.477 (95% CI: 0.287, 0.667). This suggests that there is a moderate positive effect on LM. Whereas Figure 3 has an overall impact of 0.571 (95% CI: 0.398, 0.745), this demonstrates that SE has a moderately positive effect on learning outcomes. In addition, on average, LM and self-efficacy influence learning outcomes. Table 2. Effect sizes used for learning outcomes on LM and self-efficacy in multiple settings. Variable Moderator Effect Size 95% CI P N d SE Lower Upper Source of study Article 7 0.557 0.142 0.298 0.856 <0.001 Journal 4 0.557 0.105 0.352 0.726 <0.001 Number of participants Small 3 0.652 0.362 -0.057 1.361 0.071 Medium 4 0.741 0.143 0.460 1.021 <0.001 Large 4 0.365 0.081 0.205 0.525 <0.001 Major of students Non-English 8 0.576 0.097 0.387 0.766 <0.001 English 3 0.516 0.289 -0.051 1.082 0.074 The target of language learning IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2765 General English 9 0.555 0.087 0.385 0.724 <0.001 Writing 2 0.563 0.501 -0.418 1.544 0.261 Level of education Senior High School 3 0.811 0.202 0.416 1.206 <0.001 Collage 8 0.491 0.107 0.281 0.705 <0.001 Type of instruments Standardized Instrument 4 0.686 0.152 0.387 0.984 <0.001 Custom Instrument 7 0.500 0.108 0.288 0.712 <0.001 Moderator Variable Analysis The study considers the source, sample size, student major, language learning target, level of education, and types of instruments to act as moderators for their potential (modifying) influence on learning motivation (LM) and self-efficacy (SE) outcomes in EFL learners. These moderator variables were often found in previous meta-analyses and are relevant for understanding various contexts of learning English as a second language and thus to broaden the investigation into their effects on measured results. Table 3. Moderator Variable Analysis Variable Moderator Effect Size 95% CI P Test of Heterogeneity N d SE Lower Upper The source of the study Article 7 0.557 0.142 0.298 0.856 <0.001 93.65 Journal 4 0. 557 0.105 0.352 0.726 <0.001 77.78 Number of participants Small 3 0.652 0.362 -0.057 1.361 0.071 92.06 Medium 4 0.741 0.143 0.460 1.021 <0.001 85.40 Large 4 0.365 0.081 0.205 0.525 <0.001 83.57 The major of students Non-English 8 0.576 0.097 0.387 0.766 <0.001 89.26 English 3 0.516 0.289 -0.051 1.082 0.074 94.65 Lailul Fitriah, Mujiono, Riza Weganofa The Interplay of Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy on English Learning Outcomes of EFL Learners: A Meta-Analysis 2766 The target of language learning General English 9 0.555 0.087 0.385 0.724 <0.001 87.72 Writing 2 0.563 0.501 -0.418 1.544 0.261 96.85 Level of education Senior High School 3 0.811 0.202 0.416 1.206 <0.001 80.79 Collage 8 0.491 0.107 0.281 0.705 <0.001 91.86 Type of instruments Standardized Instrument 4 0.686 0.152 0.387 0.984 <0.001 86.55 Custom Instrument 7 0.500 0.108 0.288 0.712 <0.001 90.92 (a). The study’s source The effect size in the journal article did not change considerably, with the sum d = 0.568 (SE = 0.094). There is no pu change in the mean quantity. (b). Sample size This study made predictions based on the sample size, which might have been small, medium, or large. In contrast, the mean effect of a study on the relationship between LM and SE was conducted in small, medium, and large groups; thus, the results are not statistically significant. Therefore, the P value (0.001) suggests that the observed effect is substantial. (c) Student major An unexpected finding was observed in the comparison between English and non-English majors. While non-English majors showed a significant relationship (P < 0.001), English majors displayed an insignificant relationship (P = 0.074). This result is counterintuitive as English majors were expected to have a stronger correlation due to their specialized focus on the language. A potential explanation might involve differences in curriculum structure or varying levels of intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy between the two groups, which require further exploration in future research. (d). Target of language learning The research on LM and self-efficacy depends on general English and writing. However, there is a difference between general English and writing. The effect on general English P (<0.001) showed that the results were significant, while writing with P (0.261) showed insignificant results. So, there is a difference between the general English and writing subgroups. IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2767 (e). Educational level There are two levels of education included, namely, senior high school and college level, which shows that the combined effect of the two levels is minimal (<0.001), identifying significant results between the two groups. (f). Instrument type The predictor includes two instruments, namely standard and customized tests. The combined effect of the two types of instruments used is very significant because P (<0.001) shows that the use of standardized or custom instruments gives an overall effect with (d = 0.686 vs. d = 0.500). Publication Bias Figure 4. Funnel plot of publication bias The funnel plot above features 11 research results added to a symmetrically distributed meta-analysis. Most of the distribution of research points is positioned upwards. Thus, the research used in the meta-analysis meets the criteria that have been determined. Therefore, publication bias cannot occur. Lailul Fitriah, Mujiono, Riza Weganofa The Interplay of Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy on English Learning Outcomes of EFL Learners: A Meta-Analysis 2768 Discussion This study examined eleven studies that analyzed impact measures to investigate the relationship of LM and SE on the learning outcomes of EFL learners. The chosen studies differed in primary, target language learning, and language acquisition outcomes, which were also investigated in various ways, including the number of participants in the study and journal articles. a) Results of a study of LM and SE on learning outcomes of EFL learners. This finding emphasizes the importance of high LM and SE in EFL students' learning outcomes, including general English and writing proficiency. b) The relationship between LM and SE in various conditions. LM and SE were consistently measured across studies, demonstrating their influence and relationship with EFL learners’ learning outcomes. In this research, the researcher examined whether learning motivation and self-efficacy, along with moderator variables such as the study's source, sample size, student major, target of language learning, educational level, and instrument type, impact EFL learners' learning outcomes. Such as different studies based on the source of the study, there are two types, namely article and journal, with a P value <0.001. This indicates a significant relationship so that both have the effect of both; then on the number of participants, there are three types, namely small, medium, and large, so there are different P values for the effect size small, medium, and large. The P value of 0.071 in the small effect indicates no significant relationship; however, in the medium and extensive impact, there is a significant relationship and has an influence. Then, the major of students has a different P value; in non- English students, there is a P value <0.001; this demonstrates that there is a significant relationship or influence between the variables studied; on the other hand, the primary English students produce a P value of 0.074, this indicates no considerable relationship and effect. The following moderator variable is the target of language learning; there are different results in general English, giving results <0.001, while in English writing, P 0.261. This shows that there is no relationship between the variables studied. Furthermore, significant results are displayed at the level of education senior high school and college, with each result <0.001, and the last moderator variable, namely type of instruments, there are two instruments used, namely standardized instruments and custom instruments, with each P <0.001, this indicates a significant relationship between LM, SE and learning outcomes of EFL learners. Overall, the analysis of moderator variables shows that the source of the study, the number of participants (medium and large), the major of students (non-English students), the target of language learning (general English), the level of education and the type of instrument show that there is a significant relationship to the variables studied. In contrast, the number of participants (small), the number of major students (English), and the target of language and learning (writing) give IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2769 insignificant results, or there is no relationship between the variables studied. This study found a significant relationship between LM and SE on learning outcomes. Although the findings demonstrate a significant relationship between learning motivation, self-efficacy, and EFL learners' outcomes, it is essential to consider alternative explanations. Cultural and socioeconomic factors and differences in measurement instruments across studies may have contributed to the observed results. Addressing these variables in future research would enhance the robustness and generalizability of these findings. Researchers compared relationships based on their language learning targets predicted general English (Alieto & Torres, 2019; Aprianto et al., 2024; Celcima et al., 2024; Cheng Chang & Ting Tsai, 2022; Hosseini Fatemi & Vahidnia, 2013; Khaimah et al., 2023; Roxanne Nun ez, 2022; Wu et al., 2022; Zaid, 2020) and English writing (Sabti et al., 2019; Weda, 2018). This study's results indicate a relationship between LM and SE on the learning outcomes of EFL students. Thus, LM and SE can improve learning outcomes because high motivation can affect learning outcomes, especially for EFL students (Peng & Fu, 2021). In addition, LM and SE can affect learning outcomes for English language learners (Genç et al., 2016). On the other hand, high SE can help students in listening learning outcomes for EFL learners; this is proven in research by Rahimi & Abedini (2009) indicated that there was a significant relationship, in addition to SE being the strongest predictor of students' reading achievement (Yang et al., 2018). The target language has a considerable effect on the learning outcomes of EFL learners, but the ES does not differ significantly depending on the target language. The researchers examined two learning outcomes in this study: general and writing English. The findings from the meta-analysis of previous research by Haidari et al. (2023) showed a significant relationship between SE, LM, and learning outcomes of EFL learners. This meta-analysis has notable limitations that should be acknowledged. Variability among the included studies, stemming from differences in research design, participant characteristics, and measurement tools, poses a challenge to synthesizing consistent findings. The limited number of studies included in the analysis further constrains the generalizability of the results, as a broader dataset could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomena under investigation. Additionally, inconsistencies in defining and operationalizing key variables, such as learning motivation and self-efficacy, may impact the reliability of the conclusions. Future research should address these issues by employing standardized methodologies, expanding the scope of included studies, and ensuring uniformity in variable measurement to enhance the robustness and applicability of the findings. The relationship between learning motivation, self- efficacy, and learning outcomes can be explained through their combined influence Lailul Fitriah, Mujiono, Riza Weganofa The Interplay of Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy on English Learning Outcomes of EFL Learners: A Meta-Analysis 2770 on student engagement and persistence. Motivation drives effort and focus, while self-efficacy strengthens confidence and resilience in tackling challenges. These factors encourage active participation, effective learning strategies, and perseverance, ultimately leading to better academic performance. Understanding these mechanisms highlights the importance of fostering motivation and self- efficacy in education. Conclusion The results revealed that the mean effect measure value (d = 0.576) indicates a strong relationship between LM and SE and the learning outcomes of EFL learners. These findings underscore the importance of implementing tailored motivational strategies and interventions to enhance learning motivation and self- efficacy among EFL learners. Teachers can foster intrinsic motivation and build self-efficacy through targeted feedback, goal-setting practices, and classroom activities that challenge students while providing necessary support. Applying these findings in educational practice requires educators to implement strategies that enhance LM and SE. This can include personalized goal-setting, constructive feedback focusing on progress, and collaborative tasks that foster confidence and engagement. Schools should also emphasize professional development for teachers, enabling them to effectively cultivate student motivation and resilience. These approaches create a learning environment that enhances EFL learners' academic performance and fosters sustained success in their educational journey. Future research should explore the longitudinal effects of LM and SE on learning outcomes, investigate causal relationships through experimental designs, and examine how specific cultural and contextual factors mediate these interactions in different educational settings. References A. Aladini, A., & Abu Owda, M. (2020). Students’ Self-Efficacy Towards Learning English Through Drama and CLIL. Research Journal of Education, 68, 113– 120. https://doi.org/10.32861/rje.68.113.120 Alieto, E., & Torres, J. M. (2019). English Learning Motivation and Self-Efficacy of Filipino Senior High School Students. Asian EFL Journal, 22(1), 51–72. http://www.asian-efl-journal.com Ancheta, R. F., & Bocar, A. C. (2024). Factors influencing student learning outcomes: A study on behavioral, cognitive and experiential challenges. Journal of Cognition, Emotion & Education, 2(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22034/cee.2024.441899.1017 Aprianto, D., Agus Syahid, & Abdussamad, Z. (2024). Examining the Correlation among Motivation, Self-efficacy, and English Language Proficiency (ELP) across Gender. Journal of Language and Literature Studies, 4(2), 277–295. IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2771 https://doi.org/10.36312/jolls.v4i2.1899 Bakar, R. (2014). THE EFFECT OF LEARNING MOTIVATION ON STUDENT’S PRODUCTIVE COMPETENCIES IN VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, WEST SUMATRA. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 4(6), 2226–5139. http://www.aessweb.com/journals/5007 Bandura, A. (1997). SELF-EFFICACY The Exercise of Control. Baumeister, R. F. (2016). Toward a general theory of motivation: Problems, challenges, opportunities, and the big picture. Motivation and Emotion, 40(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-015-9521-y Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V. ., Higgins, J. P. T. ., & Rothstein, H. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Borenstein, M., Higgins, J. P. T., Hedges, L. V., & Rothstein, H. R. (2017). Basics of meta-analysis: I2 is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity. Research Synthesis Methods, 8(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1230 Celcima, D., Osmani, F., Bardhi, E. K., & Icka, E. M. (2024). THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ACADEMIC MOTIVATION AND SELF-EFFICACY IN UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS: KOSOVO CASE. Revista de Gestao Social e Ambiental, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n1-193 Cheng Chang, Y., & Ting Tsai, Y. (2022). The Effect of University Students’ Emotional Intelligence, Learning Motivation and Self-Efficacy on Their Academic Achievement—Online English Courses. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(February), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.818929 Dan, N., Tran, N., Thy, P., & Nhi, H. (2022). The Relationship between Students’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs and Their English Language Achievement. Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.32996/jeltal Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Ten commandments for motivating language learners: results of an empirical study. Language Teaching Research, 2(3), 203–229. Ekowati, K. (2019). Factors Influencing Students' Learning Outcomes In Statistical Methods Course. International Journal AJES, 3(2), 33–37. Engidaw, A. E. (2021). The effect of motivation on employee engagement in public sectors: in the case of North Wollo zone. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 10(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-021-00185- 1 Ersanlı, C. Y. (2015). The Relationship between Students’ Academic Self-efficacy and Language Learning Motivation: A Study of 8th Graders. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 472–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.534 Farihah, U., & Rakasiwi, P. (2020). The effect of self-efficacy on students' motivation and learning outcome of class 8 in building flat side space Lailul Fitriah, Mujiono, Riza Weganofa The Interplay of Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy on English Learning Outcomes of EFL Learners: A Meta-Analysis 2772 material. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1563(1), 012069. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1563/1/012069 Filgona, J., Sakiyo, J., Gwany, D. M., & Okoronka, A. U. (2020). Motivation in Learning. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 16–37. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2020/v10i430273 Gahemi, H., & Damirchiloo, S. (2015). The Relationship among Perfectionism, Motivation and Self-Efficacy of EFL Learners. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2(8), 230–242. www.jallr.com Gan, Z., Liu, F., & Nang, H. (2023). The Role of Self-Efficacy, Task Value, and Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations in Students’ Feedback Engagement in English Learning. Behavioral Sciences, 13(5), 428. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13050428 Genç, G., Kuluşaklı, E., & Aydın, S. (2016). Exploring EFL Learners’ Perceived Self- efficacy and Beliefs on English Language Learning. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(2), 53–68. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n2.4 Gist, M. E. (1987). Self-Efficacy: Implications for Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management Author. The Academy of Management Review, 12(3), 472–485. Haibar, R. A. L., & Yuzarion, Y. (2024). Self-Efficacy, Teacher’s Attitude, and English Language Learning Achievements. Bulletin of Counseling and Psychotherapy, 6(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.51214/00202406755000 Haidari, S. M., Koçoğlu, A., & Kanadlı, S. (2023). CONTRIBUTION OF LOCUS OF CONTROL, SELF-EFFICACY, AND MOTIVATION TO STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT: A META-ANALYTIC STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELLING. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 16(3), 245– 261. https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2023.160308 Haj, S. El, & Benhima, M. (2024). The effect of motivation on self-efficacy of English department students with mediational effects of learning styles and strategies. The Journal of Quality in Education (JoQiE), 14. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.37870/joqie.v14i23.431 Han, J., & Lu, Q. (2017). A Correlation Study among Achievement Motivation, Goal- Setting and L2 Learning Strategy in EFL Context. English Language Teaching, 11(2), 5. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v11n2p5 Hosseini Fatemi, A., & Vahidnia, F. (2013). Self-efficacy and Motivation among Iranian EFL Learners: An Investigation into their Relationships. International Journal of English Language Education, 1(3). https://doi.org/10.5296/ijele.v1i3.3771 Ismayanti, D., Said, Y. R., Usman, N., & Nur, M. I. (2024). The Students Ability in Translating Newspaper Headlines into English A Case Study. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2773 12(1), 108-131. Khatimah, Z. H., Syahid, A., & Qamariah, Z. (2023). The Correlation Between Students' Self-Efficacy, Motivation, And English Learning Outcomes. AL- MIKRAJ Jurnal Studi Islam Dan Humaniora (E-ISSN 2745-4584), 4(1), 866– 873. https://doi.org/10.37680/almikraj.v4i1.4179 Khodadad, M., & Kaur, J. (2016). Causal Relationships between Integrative Motivation, Self-Efficacy, Strategy Use, and English Language Achievement. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 3(3), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2016-2203-08 Khoirunikmah, B., Marmoah, S., & Indriayu, M. (2023). The Effect of Social Skills on Student Learning Outcomes With Self-Efficacy As a Moderating Variable. The Third International Conference on Innovations in Social Sciences Education and Engineering (ICoISSEE)-3. Lestari, Z. W., Saleh, M., Mujiyanto, J., & Yusuf, S. (2020). Students' Self-Efficacy in Learning English: A Case Study at a Vocational High School. Proceedings of the International Conference on Science and Education and Technology (ISET 2019), 443(Iset, 2019), 418–425. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200620.081 Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 339. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2700 Long, N. C., & Tuyen, L. Van. (2020). Factors Affecting Non-English Majored Students' Motivation in Learning EFL at Tertiary Level. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, 5(5), 1631–1645. https://doi.org/10.22161/ijels.55.44 Moghari, E. H., Lavasani, M. G., Bagherian, V., & Afshari, J. (2011). Relationship between perceived teacher’s academic optimism and English achievement: Role of self-efficacy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2329–2333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.102 Masruddin, M., & Abduh, N. K. (2024, May). Indonesian Language Learning for Foreign Speakers Based on Luwu Culture: A Needs Analysis Study. In 4th International Conference on Linguistics and Culture (ICLC-4 2023) (pp. 75- 80). Atlantis Press. Masruddin, Hartina, S., Arifin, M. A., & Langaji, A. (2024). Flipped learning: facilitating student engagement through repeated instruction and direct feedback. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2412500. Mujiono. (2024). Self-Efficacy and Self-Regulated Learning’s Role in Self- Directed Learning’s Impact on Academic Writing Problem- Solving for EFL Lailul Fitriah, Mujiono, Riza Weganofa The Interplay of Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy on English Learning Outcomes of EFL Learners: A Meta-Analysis 2774 Undergraduates. IJELTAL (Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistic), 9(1), 19–32. Odabas, C. (2022). An Analysis About the Relationship Between Online Homework and Perceived Responsibility, Self-Efficacy and Motivation Levels of the Students. Pedagogical Research, 7(2), em0122. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11887 Peng, R., & Fu, R. (2021). The effect of Chinese EFL students’ learning motivation on learning outcomes within a blended learning environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(6), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6235 Peters, J. L., Sutton, A. J., Jones, D. R., Abrams, K. R., Rushton, L., & Moreno, S. G. (2010). Assessing publication bias in meta-analyses in the presence of between-study heterogeneity. J. R. Statist. Soc. A, 575–591. https://academic.oup.com/jrsssa/article/173/3/575/7077661 Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A Motivational Science Perspective on the Role of Student Motivation in Learning and Teaching Contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667 Rahimi, A., & Abedini, A. (2009). THE INTERFACE BETWEEN EFL LEARNERS’ SELF-EFFICACY CONCERNING LISTENING COMPREHENSION AND LISTENING PROFICIENCY. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 3(1), 14–28. Riyanti, D. (2019). THE ROLE OF MOTIVATION IN LEARNING ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE. Journal of English Language Teaching Innovations and Materials, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.26418/jeltim.v1i1.27788 Rodliyah, R. S., & Khoirunnisa, A. (2023). The effect of journal writing on students’ writing ability and self-efficacy. Indonesian Journal of Teaching English as a Foreign Language (IJTEFL), 1(1), 19–29. https://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/ijtefl/article/view/56531 Roxainne Nuñez, M. (2022). Self-Efficacy and English Learning Motivation among Filipino High School Students. International Social Science Review, 4(1), 73– 89. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361809106 Sabti, A. A., Md Rashid, S., Nimehchisalem, V., & Darmi, R. (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). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019894289 Schneider, M., & Preckel, F. (2017). Variables associated with achievement in higher education: A systematic review of meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 143(6), 565–600. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000098 Sedgwick, P., & Marston, L. (2015). How to read a funnel plot in a meta-analysis. In British Medical Journal (Vol. 351). BMJ Publishing Group. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h4718 IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2775 Shin, M.-H. (2018). Effects of Project-based Learning on Students’ Motivation and Self-efficacy. English Teaching, 73(1), 95–114. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.73.1.201803.95 Tang, Y., Wu, H., & Zhou, Y. (2022). Motivation in College Student Study. Proceedings of the 2021 4th International Conference on Humanities Education and Social Sciences (ICHESS 2021), 615(Ichess), 242–245. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211220.040 Ulfa, M., & Bania, A. S. (2019). EFL Student’s Motivation in Learning English in Langsa, Aceh. Studies in English Language and Education, 6(1), 163–170. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v6i1.12860 Van Aert, R. C. M., Wicherts, J. M., & Van Assen, M. A. L. M. (2019). Publication bias examined in meta-analyses from psychology and medicine: A meta-meta- analysis. PLoS ONE, 14(4). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215052 Wallace, M. P., & Leong, E. I. L. (2020). Exploring language learning motivation among primary efl learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 11(2), 221–230. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1102.10 Weda, S. (2018). The Relationship of Self-Efficacy Beliefs, Motivation, and Writing Performance of Indonesian EFL Students in Higher Education Universitas Negeri Makassar. Journal of English as an International Language, 17. http://eprints.unm.ac.id/id/eprint/26776 Wijaya, O. P., & Bukhori, I. (2017). Effect of Learning Motivation, Family Factor, School Factor, and Community Factor on Student Learning Outcomes on Productive Subjects. Jurnal Pendidikan Bisnis Dan Manajemen, 3(3), 192–202. https://doi.org/10.17977/um003v3i32017p192 Wu, X., Yang, H., Liu, J., & Liu, Z. (2022). English use anxiety, motivation, self- efficacy, and their predictive effects on Chinese top university students’ English achievements. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.953600 Xue, J. (2021). Discussion on How Personal Factors Can Affect English Learning Motivation of Senior High School Students in China. Proceedings of the 2021 4th International Conference on Humanities Education and Social Sciences (ICHESS 2021), 615, 1420–1424. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211220.240 Yang, G., Badri, M., Al Rashedi, A., & Almazroui, K. (2018). The role of reading motivation, self-efficacy, and home influence in students’ literacy achievement: a preliminary examination of fourth graders in Abu Dhabi. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-018-0063-0 Yusof, N. S. H. C., Abd Razak, N. F., Nordin, N. I., & Zulkfli, S. N. (2021). Self-efficacy, Motivation, Learning Strategy and Their Impacts on Academic Performance. Lailul Fitriah, Mujiono, Riza Weganofa The Interplay of Learning Motivation and Self-efficacy on English Learning Outcomes of EFL Learners: A Meta-Analysis 2776 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(9), 451–457. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i9/11028 Zaid, H. (2020). Self-Efficacy, Academic Motivation and Achievement among Moroccan EFL Learners. International Conference on Education Quality. Zhang, Y., & Li, Z. (2021). The Cultivation of Self-efficacy in College English Learning. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Social Science and Higher Education (ICSSHE 2021), 598(Icsshe), 215–219. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211122.088 Zheng, C., Liang, J.-C., Li, M., & Tsai, C.-C. (2018). The relationship between English language learners’ motivation and online self-regulation: A structural equation modelling approach. System, 76, 144–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.05.003