Psychological Capital Related to Academic Outcomes Among University Students: A Systematic Literature Review

Introduction

Research Background

The idea of psychological capital (PsyCap) has garnered a lot of attention recently, particularly in non-academic settings such as organizations. It is highly effective in promoting positive outcomes within these organizations. Several studies have found that employee PsyCap can affect employee performance, well-being, job satisfaction, and commitment.^1–3 Therefore, the work of F. Luthans and colleagues^4,5 on PsyCap in organizational contexts needs to be broadened to academic settings because university students are future workers in the job market and need to be developed if they aspire to quickly adapt to the academic requirements of contemporary society. PsyCap functions as a personal resource that regulates the behaviors and thoughts of students and keeps them engaged in academic pursuits. For students, school is an essential institution with the potential to influence a variety of positive outcomes. Similarly, PsyCap provides students with vitality and stimulates their intrinsic motivation, enabling them to achieve their academic goals.⁶ More recently, students are becoming more interested in making PsyCap to help them do better in school. A positive psychological state, known as PsyCap, has a favorable impact on various beneficial student outcomes, including enhanced academic achievements,^7,8 improving academic engagement,^9,10 and increased psychological well-being.^11,12 These results are relevant and essential for both researchers and educators.

Psychological Capital

The term “psychological capital” refers to a resource for personality traits that includes four important components: hope, self-efficacy, optimism, and resilience.² Each element of PsyCap influences an individual’s perception of self and life goals. Hope is associated with the capacity to discover and effectively employ the means to attain one’s personal goals.¹³ PsyCap’s second component, self-efficacy, is a person’s confidence in their skills to accomplish a task or work in a sector, according to the social cognitive theory.¹⁴ Previous research indicates that students with high levels of academic self-efficacy demonstrate high grades in their coursework and achieve high scores in standardized examinations.^15–19 Resilience is the third component of PsyCap. Resilience is an individual’s positive adaptation to challenging circumstances and resistance to all types of stress in his existence.²⁰ Individual optimism about the future constitutes the fourth component of PsyCap. A positive outlook on life encourages perseverance in overcoming obstacles. This perspective originates from the belief that life’s challenges are surmountable because their causes are not fixed and can be altered.²¹ Since academic setbacks are changeable circumstances, optimistic students believe that they can be minimized in the academic context.²²

Fred Luthans has been instrumental in developing and expanding the concept of Psychological Capital (PsyCap) primarily within organizational settings. While Luthans might not have extensively studied PsyCap in academic settings, other researchers have bridged this gap, evidencing the construct’s relevance in both domains. For example, Academic PsyCap is related to several academic variables, including academic performance (as measured by GPA), fatigue, stress, learning engagement, and motivation, according to research.^23,24 PsyCap can serve as one of the antecedents for the variables listed above, as it is regarded as a valuable predictor of significant academic outcomes.²⁵ Multiple methods exist in which PsyCap resources can enhance academic performance. First, college students with a positive outlook and an optimistic evaluation of their prospects for success are more eager to exert the necessary perseverance and diligence to achieve their objectives. Moreover, students who believe in their abilities (self-efficacy) and are committed to succeeding are more prone to demonstrate intention and responsibility, resulting in enhanced academic achievement.^8,26,27 Second, pupils with a high PsyCap are more inclined to create a diversity of concepts and tactics for overcoming barriers and recovering from failures. By maintaining a positive mindset, these pupils have access to a greater variety of resources and can widen their perspectives, physical resources, social resources, and psychological resources that can enhance their performance. As a result, while each component predicts significant academic outcomes separately when all four elements combine to form PsyCap, they have a synergistic effect that has a higher impact on performance than any one variable alone.² Empirical studies have shown that PsyCap has a positive effect on academic outcomes, such as academic performance (ie, grades),^26,28,29 students’ psychological well-being,^11,12 student engagement,^30–32 and academic adjustment.^33,34

Research Questions

Over the years, numerous studies have affirmed the link between psychological capital and students’ academic achievement. However, comprehensive, holistic, and systematic reviews that summarize the achievements of the past decades and identify prospective research needs are still lacking. Given this knowledge deficit, the aim of this systematic review is to provide an exhaustive and up-to-date (2012–2022) overview of the empirical knowledge of psychological capital and its relationship to academic outcomes for university students. The research question is:

What is the current state of empirical knowledge regarding the relationship between PsyCap and academic outcomes among undergraduates, based on international, peer-reviewed English-language journals published from 2012 to 2022?

This question is broken into three sub-questions:

RQ1. What are the key research trends in positive psychological capital among college students’ academic-related outcomes from the year 2012 to 2022?

RQ2. On what key themes and pressing issues do extant literature focus?

The research has tried to explain how PsyCap and academic-related outcomes are related. This paper’s remaining sections follow this format: Methodology outlines the research design and describes the structured procedure that was utilized to identify and narrow down the literature for review based on predefined evaluation criteria. Results presents the results and provides a comprehensive analysis of the descriptive statistics and identified themes. Discussion examines the gaps that exist within the current literature, proposes potential areas for future research, and discusses the research implications. Finally, Conclusion offers conclusions.

Methodology

This study follows a systematic literature review (SLR) approach, which ensures that future scholars can replicate the research findings of the SLR. To respond to the research question, we conducted a literature review, which included searching and analyzing preliminary data collected from databases relevant to the study. The systematic review of the literature was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.³⁵ (PROSEPRO) on the 3rd May 2023: CRD42023416151.

Search Strategy and Data Source

We use the electronic databases Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus, ERIC, PsyINFO (EBSCO), Springlink, and ScienceDirect to search the included articles in January 2023 and updated in March 2023. The terms “psychological capital” “academic performance” “academic achievement” “study-related outcomes” and “academic outcomes” were mixed with other terms related to PsyCap and academic outcomes. The objective of this review is to synthesize psychological capital related to academic outcomes among university students. Different keywords were adopted: (1) academic achievement, academic success; academic performance student outcome; college success (2) psychological capital, PsyCap. The keywords were matched through the Boolean operators AND or OR. A string was adopted in four databases (Table 1). To ensure the assessment was comprehensive, we also used backward and forward snowball search techniques.³⁶ The six focal databases were then mined for a total of 1259 articles.

Table 1 Search String

Inclusion\exclusion Criteria for Studies

Based on the research topic, inclusion and exclusion criteria were established to provide a thorough knowledge of PsyCap in college students’ study-related results. To be included in the review, a paper first had to meet the related criterion; that is, academic outcomes of psychological capital among college students in an educational context. The inclusion criteria were: 1) English-language empirical research that was peer-reviewed journal; 2) The article included a discussion of academic outcomes of psychological capital among college students in an educational context. The excluded criteria were 1) An “essay, book review, letter, opinion or anecdotal article” was the category of the publication; 2) a non-relevance, and population sample consisting of adults, primary and secondary school students, schoolteachers, workplace staff, and students with diseases.

Data Extraction

Firstly, 1259 manuscripts were kept in Endnote X9, and 442 duplicates were removed. A total of 156 were removed the cause of not being published between 2012.1 to 2022.12 and the language is not using English. Secondly, two independent authors screened the articles with the eligibility criteria based on the title, abstract, and keywords, 694 articles were removed. After a full-text inspection, 43 articles published between 2012 and 2022 were selected for qualitative synthesis. The PRISMA flowchart (Figure 1) reports the number of articles included and excluded in each step. Results and management were carried out using Microsoft Office software such as Excel and Word. EndNote X9 was used to edit and organize the bibliography.

Figure 1 PRISMA flow diagram. Notes: PRISMA figure adapted from Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. Creative Commons.35

Quality Assessment

The Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT) developed by Crowe was utilized to assess the research quality that was included. The CCAT tool is relevant in this review because it enables the evaluation of a wide variety of research designs, including quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method studies. This is important because the types of study designs used in this review are heterogeneous. In addition, it offers a high level of dependability.^37,38 The CCAT (Critical Appraisal Tool) we used consisted of eight categories of items (Introduction, Background, Methods, Sampling, Data Collection, Ethics, Results, and Discussion), with each category item receiving a score of 5 out of a possible 5, and 40 is the total score. (See Supplementary Table 1) The CCAT User’s Guide contains comprehensive scoring instructions and references for each category item³⁹ (See Supplementary Table 2).

Synthesis and Analysis of Results

For analysis, 43 articles in total were uploaded to ATLAS.ti 22. And using ATLAS.ti 22 for literature review analysis introduced by Zairul.⁴⁰ Each article was categorized by the author, journal name, journal number, publisher, and year of publication. Quantitative and qualitative findings are presented in this paper. The quantitative section focuses primarily on the regional, journal, and national distribution of academic research articles. In the section on qualitative data analysis, the primary method employed was thematic analysis, which was used to classify and summarize the articles and ultimately construct the framework while ensuring that the framework and data were linked.⁴¹ This method involves coding, categorizing, and refining themes extracted from raw data.⁴² The present research follows the 6-step framework outlined by Clarke & Braun.⁴² The subsequent steps are as follows: 1) familiar with the data, 2) generate codes, 3) find themes, 4) review themes, 5) define themes, and 6) explain themes.

We began the thematic analysis by immersing ourselves in the data and gaining familiarity with the content of the articles about the research question. In the subsequent two steps, we initially assigned codes to the articles based on general themes, using an inductive method that allowed themes to develop from specific observations in the empirical studies. This involved focusing on key aspects of the articles, such as the author, publication year and country, the purpose of the study, study design, and study conclusions, and extracting recurring subject terms. Firstly, we reviewed all established themes and sorted out any overlaps or strongly interrelated themes. In the fifth step, we merged and defined all the shortlisted themes, continuously revising them until all sub-themes were grouped under the main theme. In the final step, we refined and defined the themes further, with the first two authors reaching a consensus on each theme through discussion and consideration of its connection to the research question. If there were any disagreements, a third author was consulted. After reviewing and validating the initial codes, we proceeded to identify and refine the themes. The resulting set of themes and their analysis are presented in the following section. Through an iterative process, we categorized the initial codes into broader subjects and had discussions among the authors, which led to the identification of: present the antecedents (ie, what influences PsyCap) and consequences (ie, what does PsyCap produce students’ related outcomes) and their roles in academic outcomes among university students (ie, does PsyCap play mediate /moderate role?).

Results

To aid in our understanding, the writers separately categorized the chosen journal articles into categories based on their themes. By year, location, journal, research goals, methodology, and important findings, the selected publications were examined. The distribution of psychological capital and CCAT scores among college students is described in detail in Table 2.

Table 2 The Characteristics and CCAT Scores of the 43 Studies

Contexts and Characteristics of the Studies

As presented in Figure 2, among the 43 articles selected for systematic review, 2 articles were published in 2015 and 2016 respectively, and 5 were published in 2017, the number of journal articles published on psychological capital related to academic outcomes among university students keeps increasing from 2018 to 2022. The increase in the quantity of literature is indicative of the pervasive interest in the application of PsyCap in higher education.

Figure 2 Publications arranged by publication year.

By highlighting the scope of journals publishing such studies, the increasing academic interest in the field is further emphasized. These 43 articles were published in 36 different journals, with 32 journals having only one article and three journals having only two articles. Among them, “Frontiers in Psychology” had five articles, ranking first among all journals (see Supplementary Material). Researchers from various nations have contributed to the study of PsyCap of graduate students and its impact on academic outcomes based on data retrieved over the past decade. Eighteen countries have participated in research on the academic application of psychological capital. The countries with the highest quantity of published papers are displayed in Figure 3. The United States and China published the most papers, followed by Portugal (four), Pakistan, and India (three each). China (Taiwan), Indonesia, Malaysia, Romania, and Spain had 2 papers each. The following observations can be made from the graph: Developed nations have a greater publication capacity than developing and underdeveloped nations. The publication records of all nations are comparatively low, although they have risen over the past two years. This suggests that each nation should invest more in the PsyCap of its college students, primarily through scientific research. Academic interest in this subject has increased consistently over the past decade (2012–2022). By emphasizing the variety of journals publishing such studies, the growing academic interest in this field is emphasized further.

Figure 3 Geographical distribution of journal articles.

Themes

To have an in-depth knowledge of PsyCap related to academic outcomes among university students, we summarize the focal themes based on the outcome variables. The findings of the 43 selected studies related to 1) psychological capital measurement; 2) the antecedents and 3) consequences and 4) their roles in academic outcomes among university students that emerged from the thematic analysis. The antecedents mainly focus on what influences PsyCap. And the consequences are about what does PsyCap produce students’ related outcomes)? Their roles in academic outcomes among university students mean does PsyCap play a mediate /moderate role? (Figure 4).

Figure 4 Key themes and subthemes in the literature on psychological capital related to academic outcomes among university students.

Psychological Capital Measurement

For example, Luthans et al² created and validated a 24-item Psychological Capital Questionnaire (PCQ) that was first designed for the workplace but subsequently adapted for academic settings.⁷ Another part of the study is an adaptation of psychological capital measurement of^2,7,74 based on their research subjects. The above psychological capital measurement approach is to measure psychological capital, and some studies measure each of the four components of PsyCap and finally aggregate them into psychological capital. For instance, the study by Kirikkanat and Soyer,⁴³ uses the PsyCap Test Battery, which consists of 55 items, including four scales: a) The Academic Self-Efficacy Scale; b) The Life Orientation Test; c) The Hope Scale; d) The Resilience Scale. In another study by Adil et al,⁴⁵ for measuring the four parts of academic PsyCap, the authors chose the Perceived Self-Efficacy subscale of the Learning Strategies Scale, the Academic subscale of the Life Orientation Test, the Academic Hope Scale, and the Academic Resilience Scale. Complete information on the psychological capital measures can be viewed in Table 2.

Antecedents: What Influences Students’ Psychological Capital?

Despite extensive literature reporting the benefits of PsyCap, there is still limited understanding of its antecedents and consequences.⁷⁵ The summary of the research shows that the factors affecting the PsyCap of individuals can be analyzed in terms of personal factors and sociocultural factors.

From a person’s point of view, studies that have influenced the development of psychological capital are listed below. A recent study has shown that individual differences (like self-esteem and self-concept) are more important than demographic factors and external factors (like the difficulty of activities) in predicting PsyCap.⁷⁶ Numerous investigations have found beneficial relationships between various personality traits and academic PsyCap. Hicks and Wu⁵⁷ found that adaptive perfectionism was associated with higher PsyCap. According to Lye et al,⁷⁰ emotional intelligence (EI) is an important factor in predicting PsyCap among engineering students, while age, gender, race, family income, and pre-university education of the students cannot significantly predict PsyCap. Moreover, da Costa et al⁵⁵ contented that students’ emotional intelligence is a major factor in PsyCap that goes beyond individual differences and training.

Some research in recent years has discovered that some features of the familial environment, such as the bond between parents and children and the support of the family, are antecedents of PsyCap and have a big effect on it.^47,75,77 Similarly, Zhang et al⁵¹ also point out high family income predicts higher PsyCap in individuals, as it provides material wealth that builds confidence and optimism and reflects a higher parental education level which encourages positive qualities in their children. Additionally, The outcomes from one quantitative study confirmed that there is a strong link between psychological capital and the support of parental liberty.⁶⁵ Academic and Peer support positively impact the development of individual resources within student PsyCap, both separately and together, as they reflect students’ perceptions of supportive academic and peer environments, respectively.⁵³ Nielsen et al⁷⁸ also found that instructors’ encouragement helps students build their PsyCap. Thus, these findings deepen our comprehension of the affective antecedents of academic PsyCap, where both personal and family-social factors influence individual psychological capital, and in addition in teamwork, where harmonious team relationships are integral contributors to individuals’ psychological capital.

Outcomes: What Does Students’ Psychological Capital Produce?

As research on PsyCap rapidly advances, more and more scholars are focusing on the impact of its elements on individual behavior. In academia, an increasing body of studies suggests that PsyCap has a beneficial influence on students’ outcomes.⁵³

Academic Performance

In a university setting, academic performance is among the most essential results, and PsyCap is a variable that affects academic success. 59 Because self-regulated learners do better in university and tend to be successful students, Sava et al 60 found that psychological capital has an important role, over teacher support and the need for competence satisfaction, in the explanation of the student’s preference for self-regulating their learning. Moreover, Luthans et al⁵⁴ found discovered that business undergraduates with higher total academic PsyCap scores tend to have higher GPAs. Vanno et al⁷⁹ investigated the relationship between PsyCap and students’ GPAs in their study and asserted that higher levels of PsyCap are associated with higher GPAs, and vice versa. Likewise, Kirikkanat and Soyer⁴³ maintained that students’ PsyCap scores significantly predict their academic success scores in a positive direction. The success of undergraduate freshmen (n = 510) is significantly linked to academic PsyCap, which has a positive correlation with GPA, as found by Sweet and Swayze⁶¹ even after controlling for predicted GPA.

Sharma and Barmola²⁸ have found that psychological capital may have a more important role than emotional intelligence in competitive exam success. These findings align with previous studies, which have established a positive correlation between academic PsyCap and academic-related outcomes, even after accounting for other variables. Furthermore, Carmona–Halty et al²⁷ linked positive psychological states with academic achievement through both direct and indirect effects. A possible explanation for this positive relationship is that PsyCap has motivational potential, which leads to an improvement in academic performance.¹⁰ The positive combination of the four PsyCap abilities is indeed more strongly related to academic achievement, supporting the synergistic motivational effect created among these psychological abilities, allowing students to overcome obstacles, maintain motivation, and achieve learning outcomes.⁶⁹

In contrast, a study by Liran and Miller⁵² discovered that it does not appear to provide definitive support for earlier studies about the relationship between PsyCap and GPA. There were significant positive relationships between all the subscales of PsyCap and the academic adaptation subscales collected from the four questionnaires. However, it is worth noting that students’ GPAs were only significantly related to two components of PsyCap: hope and resilience. And through the empirical data, Saman and Wirawan⁵⁹ showed that PsyCap could only influence students’ academic performance through mediating factors. In another study, student PsyCap also shows an indirect influence on student academic performance through engagement.³¹

In summary, these results suggest that the impact of PsyCap on academic achievement is largely direct; all four elements of PsyCap have a certain degree of influence on academic achievement, and PsyCap can also enhance its impact on academic achievement through other mediating variables.

Academic Engagement

Reeve et al⁸⁰ propose that student engagement involves the behavioral intensity, emotional quality, and personal investment that students demonstrate in learning activities, and also involves the institutions serving as learning environments. A positive (reciprocal) relationship was found between PsyCap and academic engagement by Siu et al.⁹ PsyCap and academic empowerment are major antecedents of academic engagement, which is an important indication of learning quality. PsyCap motivates and engages learners.⁵⁶ Similarly, Noviati³¹ showed PsyCap has a significant impact on student engagement because it reduces academic stress, and increases emotional, affective, and cognitive proactivity, ultimately promoting learning outcomes. In the same year, Jafri⁶ found that PsyCap in students assists them in remaining engaged in their academic endeavors. Previous research conducted in educational settings suggests that students’ PsyCap is intended to have a direct relationship with their academic engagement.⁸¹ In educational settings, these sources indicate a relationship between PsyCap and student engagement. The connection between PsyCap and engagement can be comprehended through Hobfoll’s⁸² Conservation of Resources Theory (CRT), which explains accumulating resources to achieve certain goals. From the viewpoint of Self-Regulation Theory, a different explanation for this association can be understood, which focuses on how students direct their attention to their academic goals and activities. However, Lin⁶³ asserted PsyCap itself is not a strong predictor of learning engagement.

Academic Burnout

Academic burnout negatively correlated with academic PsyCap in several studies. For example, academic burnout was found to be associated with academic PsyCap in Iran.⁶⁷ Likewise, Wang et al³⁰ concluded that nursing students with stronger PsyCap had higher academic engagement and decreased burnout. Academic engagement largely mediated psychological capital and academic fatigue. This is supported by Virga et al¹⁰ who also found that PsyCap reduced students’ burnout and boredom, via study engagement. It was found that there is a negative correlation between college students’ academic exhaustion and their families’ cohesion and adaptability.⁷¹ Radack et al⁷³ noted that PsyCap mediates the relationship between peer support and academic burnout, indicating its role as an intrapersonal resource. Optimism predicts the emotional exhaustion aspect of academic burnout in undergraduates and serves as a protective factor against burnout-related stressors.

Academic Adjustment

College students’ adjustment challenges are currently a growing concern. Certain research has demonstrated that PsyCap serves as a safeguarding element for academic adjustment. Hope has a favorable association with school adaptation, and optimism indicated that college students will adjust better to their new environment.⁸³ In addition, SEM analysis suggests that students recruit positive resources, such as psychological capital, to cope with academic challenges and improve their academic adaptation. Self-efficacy has a significant impact on academic adaptation, and PsyCap has the potential to improve student satisfaction and well-being in response to academic pressures.⁵⁰ According to research, students whose PsyCap scores are higher than average are more eager to engage in social contacts, resulting in more enjoyment from social activities as part of their academic lives. PsyCap can boost well-being, which results in a mode of handling more malleable stress.⁵²

Other Outcomes

When students believe in their capacity and competence to do certain academic assignments and are optimistic about the outcome, they feel inwardly motivated to complete such tasks. As a result, PsyCap can be used to predict students’ intrinsic motivation.⁶ Additionally, PsyCap has been found to increase positive emotions,⁸⁴ which in turn improves students’ motivation and utilization of learning strategies.²⁷ Moreover, PsyCap has direct effects on academic satisfaction⁶⁸ and may enhance students’ potential and help them achieve academic objectives.⁸⁵ Interventions aimed at improving PsyCap among university students have been found to significantly increase PsyCap levels, which remained stable even after one month.⁸⁶ A significant negative correlation was discovered by Hicks and Wu⁵⁷ between PsyCap and procrastination, indicating that a negative correlation existed between greater scores on PsyCap and higher scores on academic procrastination. The role of psychological capital in academic settings suggests that psychological capital profiles can affect internal learning in teams differentially.⁵⁸ The experience of stress, stemming from various stressors, can manifest as either positive (eustress) or negative (distress). Notably, psychological capital has been observed to alleviate the impact of academic distress on academic performance, while its effect on academic eustress remains limited.⁶⁹ This indicates that Academic PsyCap’s positive resources significantly correlate with all measured coping components for academic stress.⁴⁸ This correlation was also highlighted in the research of Xu and Wang, where they similarly discovered an inverse relationship between academic stress and all four PsyCap components.⁶⁰ Also students who had a high cumulative grade point average, received information on stress reduction, were aware of mental health resources on campus, felt experiences that challenged them to grow and become a better person, felt their life had a sense of direction or meaning to it.⁴⁶

Psychological as a Mediator

Beyond these evident relationships, educational scholars are intrigued by the significance of PsyCap as a mediating component. For instance, one study found PsyCap fully mediated academic support and academic performance, partially mediated academic support and learning engagement, and peer support and academic performance.⁵³ Chen et al⁶⁴ stated that PsyCap and academic self-efficacy mediate the impact of learning experiences on achievement. Furthermore, Hicks and Wu⁵⁷ revealed that PsyCap mediates between academic adaptation and procrastination, fully mediating the relationship between creative coping and positive emotions, and partially mediating negative emotions. PsyCap may have a suppressive influence on students’ relationship between creative coping and academic stress.⁶⁰ Geremias, Lopes, and Soares confirmed the mediating role of PsyCap in the relationship between student network centrality and internal learning in teams.²⁶ The results of earlier studies on the connection between PsyCap and emotions as well as the association between PsyCap and coping were generally consistent.⁸⁷ According to recent research by Chaffin et al,⁶² who asserted PsyCap plays a crucial role in explaining the integrity-academic achievement relationship and has a significant mediating effect between LGO and satisfaction/performance, indicating the existence of a mechanism between them. PsyCap can motivate pupils to finish a task or attain a goal and give them psychological tools to handle tough situations.⁶⁶ One study confirmed the mediating role of the perceived team structure in the relationship between psychological capital and internal learning in teams,⁷² and was a mediator between personality traits and academic achievement.²³ Furthermore, PsyCap was positively associated with the dimensions of school adjustment and negatively associated with negative life events. PsyCap partially mediated the relationship between negative life events and school adjustment.⁴⁹

Discussion

This review’s principal objective was to provide a comprehensive analysis of PsyCap related to student outcomes. Using the PRISMA method, we reviewed the literature and pulled 43 articles from six databases. Based on the analysis of these articles, two distinct approaches were used in this paper. The first section is quantitative, highlighting numerical data taken from ATLAS.ti 22, and it concentrates on the 43 articles’ study year, their country and region of publication, and the journal. The second part is a qualitative analysis, which focuses on the measurement instruments of PsyCap, most of the current studies mainly use Luthans, Avolio, Avey, and Norma We primarily focused on the assessment tools for PsyCap. Our analysis extends to the antecedents of PsyCap, categorized as Personal Factors: Attributes like self-esteem, motivation, gratitude, integrity, and overall well-being. Social Influences: Dynamics such as parent-child rapport, familial reinforcement, support from peers and educators, and later the emergence of measurement instruments for academic PsyCap. To clarify further, these personal and social factors significantly influence the evolution of PsyCap, though they are not directly academic outcomes in themselves. Instead, these factors cultivate PsyCap, which in turn impacts the subsequent academic results. The academic outcomes we closely examined include academic performance, academic engagement, academic burnout, academic adjustment, and academic, students’ intrinsic motivation. Through our comprehensive investigation, we discerned that PsyCap relates intricately with these academic outcomes. Moreover, PsyCap plays a pivotal role as a moderator, influencing the relationship between various variables and these educational outcomes.

Using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT), we assessed 43 studies on university students’ psychological capital, with scores ranging from 31 to 38 out of a possible 40. The range of scores, from a low of 31 to a high of 38, indicates the variance in research rigor, methodology, and possibly the depth of exploration within the chosen themes. The majority showed high quality, with 23 articles scoring 36 or above and 5 achieving 38. This illustrates the rigorous methodologies employed. Conversely, 11 studies scored between 31 to 32, suggesting potential issues. The CCAT scores bolster confidence in our systematic review’s findings, but we advise caution when interpreting lower-scoring studies. While CCAT provides a quantitative assessment, it might not capture all research nuances.

By incorporating the antecedents, outcomes, and (mediating) processes related to student PsyCap into a single figure, this study represents the first to take an extensive and all-encompassing approach to studying student psychological capital. This research contributes to the general psychological capital literature and has implications for educational institutions seeking to develop students’ psychological capital for the betterment of both individuals and society.

While this study has made many meaningful contributions, we acknowledge several limitations. The articles from the journals included in this research were selected based on our criteria, which may have missed some valuable materials. To guarantee the quality of the literature being analyzed, we extracted data from six databases. Extracting literature from various sources, including conference proceedings, research reports, working papers, theses, books, journals, white papers, and industry reports, could be a focus of future research. Including more sources and a broader network can help gain more insights. A second limitation is that we limited the scope of our search to studies published in English and confined our findings to studies published in English. Relevant articles may have been missed, however, additional manual searching of the articles retrieved did not uncover additional references. Furthermore, as research on college students’ psychological capital related to academic outcomes is still in its early stages, we used descriptive and thematic analysis in the systematic review. However, this is not a meta-analysis, so it may not be used to draw summary statistical insights about any exploratory themes.

Indeed, despite these limitations, the study’s findings have important implications for both theoretical and practical aspects of educational psychology. PsyCap is a personal resource that is malleable and can be developed,⁸⁸ so students can exploit its benefits to enhance their academic success. The study’s practical significance lies in the importance of fostering students’ PsyCap for both theoretical expansion and practical application in educational psychology. Higher education institutions should prioritize enhancing students’ psychological capital. Various methods can be employed in daily life and learning to improve college students’ psychological capital and cultivate a healthy psychological state. For instance, to help students acquire fundamental knowledge, recognize the importance of PsyCap, and focus on self-improvement, establishing psychological health courses centered on PsyCap is a viable option. In addition, cultivating students’ confidence and sense of responsibility can be achieved by encouraging them to express their opinions via teamwork, and fostering an optimistic life attitude can be achieved by guiding them to deal with difficulties and pressure adequately. In the future, it is recommended that systematic interventions for PsyCap be devised and incorporated into education. Theoretically, this study will expand and enrich the literature on PsyCap, particularly from the standpoint of educational background. We analyze and summarize the current research on the effects of PsyCap on academic-related variables and further analyze its antecedents and outcomes as well as its effects on other factors as mediating and moderating variables, identifying gaps in the current research, and indicating new study directions.

Despite these limitations, this commentary provides direction for future research and adds valuable information to this rapidly growing and critically important field in the current global context. First, relying solely on self-report measures as the sole data collection method may undermine the validity of the obtained information. Future research may benefit from a multi-method approach. Incorporating diverse data collection techniques may be crucial. For example, conducting interviews with students who exhibit a complete PsyCap profile and those who exhibit an empty PsyCap profile can provide an alternative perspective for analysis. Second, more investigation is required to examine this additional channel. Regression models cannot infer causal correlations since the included studies utilized a cross-sectional design. Future studies should investigate these associations experimentally and longitudinally to ascertain their magnitude and direction of causation. Tracking and intervention research could also be used in follow-up studies to identify causal correlations between variables. Third, future research that evaluates the four psychological capital subscales independently should include additional features not observed in the current study. The four PsyCap sub-dimensions can be combined in various ways that may have varying effects on results.⁸⁹ Previous empirical study has demonstrated that the four PsyCap abilities may contribute differently to explaining specific behaviors or outcomes.⁹⁰ Furthermore, the study was conducted within a particular cultural context and there is a need for further cross-cultural research to improve our comprehension of university students’ psychological capital development. In addition, upcoming research should expand to investigate students from different educational levels (such as undergraduate), different fields and disciplines, more geographical regions, and various types of institutions to ensure a more representative sample. Lastly, it is necessary to investigate the specific intervention measures aimed at enhancing PsyCap and their impact on student academic outcomes in the future. This will further inform mentors, advisors, and administrators and advocate for policies, practices, guidance, and plans that may improve student academic-related outcomes.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this systematic review examined contemporary research on PsyCap related to academic outcomes among university students and shows that this is a promising area of research. This systematic review maps and summarizes the current literature on PsyCap in academic outcomes research among university students and provides a roadmap for future research on the holistic development of PsyCap. PsyCap with positive academic outcomes. Most of the discussed literature analyzes the measurement instruments of PsyCap, analyzes the factors influencing PsyCap from individual and social perspectives, and additionally analyzes the effects of PsyCap on variables related to student learning. PsyCap has mostly positive effects on student learning, for example, PsyCap can improve academic performance, promote student engagement, improve student adjustment to learning, increase student motivation, and reduce academic burnout. PsyCap does not only act directly on learning-related variables, but PsyCap can also act between other variables through mediation or moderation. To summarize, research in this field indicates that successful students possess higher expectations for their abilities and motivations, enabling them to devise alternative means to attain their academic objectives. They also demonstrate robust self-efficacy in their pursuit of academic goals, exhibiting tenacity in the face of uncertainty, conflict, failure, and setbacks, and maintaining a pragmatic and optimistic outlook toward achieving positive academic outcomes. PsyCap, as a form of personal strength, is crucial in students’ academic lives. However, current research is primarily concerned with the outcome variables of PsyCap, with less attention devoted to the antecedents and consequences that give rise to PsyCap, and there is relatively little research on methods to improve students’ PsyCap.