Does time management fuel nursing students’ innovation?
In 763 undergraduate nursing students, time-management scores predicted innovative behavior both directly (effect 0.263) and through academic self-efficacy and flow (total mediation 62.9%).
Source
The impact of undergraduate nursing students' time management disposition on innovative behavior: the chain mediating role of academic self-efficacy and flow experience
Study at a glance
- Design
- Cross-sectional — Questionnaire survey of undergraduate nursing students with a chain-mediation SEM (time management → self-efficacy → flow → innovative behavior)
- N
- N=763 · 763 valid questionnaires from 3 Jiangsu universities; 95.38% effective response; ages 17–22 (mean 19.55)
- Population
- Undergraduate nursing students at three universities in Jiangsu Province, China
- Outcome
- Innovative behavior, with academic self-efficacy and flow as mediators of time-management disposition
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
Inspect source passages
Does time management fuel nursing students’ innovation?
These passages occur verbatim in the stored paper text. They support the points listed below; they do not verify every statement in the explanation.
763 valid questionnaires; 95.38% effective response.
Ultimately, 763 valid questionnaires were collected, resulting in an effective response rate of 95.38%.
Direct effect of time management on innovative behavior was 0.263.
The results of the Bootstrap analysis revealed that the direct effect of time management disposition on innovative behavior was significant (effect size 0.263).
What they did
Surveyed students at three Jiangsu universities with time-management, academic self-efficacy, flow, and innovative-behavior scales, then tested a chain-mediation structural equation model with 5,000 bootstraps.
What they found
Time management correlated with self-efficacy (r=0.691), flow (0.732), and innovation (0.630). Direct path 0.263; self-efficacy mediation 0.115; flow 0.205; chain 0.126. Model fit was good (RMSEA 0.050, CFI 0.982).
The limits
What it doesn't show
Cross-sectional self-report cannot prove that teaching time management causes innovation; common-method bias and one province limit causal claims.
Key terms
- Time management disposition
- Trait-like time value, monitoring, and efficiency measured with a 44-item adolescent scale.
- Academic self-efficacy
- Belief in one’s ability to succeed at academic tasks; first mediator.
- Flow experience
- Absorbed, high-focus engagement; second mediator in the chain.
- Innovative behavior
- Self-reported generation and application of new ideas in study/practice.
- Chain mediation
- Indirect path TMD → self-efficacy → flow → innovative behavior.
- Bootstrap
- 5,000 resamples used to get 95% CIs for indirect effects.
Flashcards
0 of 8 answers reviewed
Research intelligence for this paper
See its role on concept claims, tensions it is part of, placement history, and related discoveries.
Quiz yourself
Valid N was:
Common questions
How many valid surveys?
763 (95.38% effective response).
What predicted innovation?
Time-management disposition, directly and via self-efficacy and flow.
Direct effect size?
0.263; total mediation 0.446 (62.9% of the effect).
Student ages?
17–22 years (mean 19.55 ± 1.20).
More on Self-regulation