1. Introduction

When primary school students enter the junior high school stage progressively, students' learning pressure is also gradually increasing. At the same time, middle school students are mostly entering puberty. Students' psychology and physiology gradually become complicated and uneasy, and students' learning interest and ability will be affected by adolescence. Therefore, this paper examines ways to inform students about the challenges they have in their learning throughout the crucial and challenging time of junior high school and offers recommendations for how junior high school students can manage their own study pressure and increase their study efficiency.

The study mainly explores the relation between learning stress and academic self-efficacy and the influence of learning stress on middle school students' learning burnout (LB). Learning pressure is the learning behavior, task and emotion caused by the learning behavior or task that students have to undertake in learning. LB refers to whether students can take the initiative to solve the Learning Pressure (LP). Academic self-efficacy (ASE) means that whether students have the study ability and confidence to resolve study tasks and keep up with academic progress within a certain range of efficiency. According to this study, middle school pupils' learning outcomes are largely determined by these three factors. The most crucial responsibility for junior high school pupils is studying, and study pressure is a widespread social issue. Some people believe that LP can make students eliminate LB and enhance their ASE. However, some people think that LP is not good for students' learning efficacy and will make students passive. In order to gain a greater awareness the relationship between LB, ASE, and study stress, this study will examine and assess pertinent prior studies.

2. Impact of LP on LB

It is concerning how LP affects LB. The LP on middle school pupils in particular will typically rise. According to pertinent research, middle school pupils experience higher levels of stress than the general population. Due to rising study pressure, a significant number of students are suffering from burnout [1]. The relevant research that is accessible right now indicates that LB is significantly impacted by LP. Relevant study by Bryce Stoliker supports the notion that LP and LB are significantly correlated [2]. The majority of relevant research indicating usually hold that LB will be more severe if students' LP is greater, despite the opinion of some experts that individual differences will prevent some students from experiencing burnout when facing learning strain [3].

This view is also supported by the relevant research of Yang Fei, who analyzed the relation between LP and LB of middle school students through a questionnaire survey [4].

The study included seventh - and eighth-graders who were too busy studying to take part in the questionnaire. A total of 697 questionnaires were recovered. The questionnaire was evenly distributed between men and women, and the interval of age was between 12 and 15 years old. Students in this age group are generally in adolescence. Their mental state has generally become very subtle, and their response to LP is also very sensitive. Both the LP scale and the LB scale are pertinent research instruments utilized in this study. The five dimensions that make up the LP scale are task demand pressure, frustration pressure, competitive pressure, expectation pressure, and pressure for self-improvement. With a 5-point Likert scale (from "1 = no stress" through "5 = a lot of stress, almost unbearable"), the questionnaire has 62 questions. The scores in each dimension are added together as part of the scoring process. A higher overall score indicates a higher amount of LP for the individual. This scale has an excellent level of credibility when used in conjunction with earlier research. This scale had a Cronbach α coefficient of 0.98. The LB scale is divided into physical and mental exhaustion, alienation from learning and low sense of accomplishment. A total of 16 questions were scored on a Likert 5 scale (" 1 = completely inconsistent "to" 5 = very consistent "). Among them, 1, 4, 7, 14, 15 and 16 are scored in reverse order. The total average score reflects the overall level of student burnout. If the average score is higher than 3, it indicates that students have LB. The component table shows the individual level in each dimension; the greater the score, the more severe the LB. A person's burnout on all aspects increases with a higher score. This scale is designed for Chinese teenagers. In recent years, it has been widely used and has a good reputation. It has gained popularity and a solid reputation in recent years. This scale had a Cronbach α coefficient of 0.83.

The study shows that the LP scale results show that the general LP of junior high school students is in the middle level, but the expected stress level is high. LB is mainly manifested as physical and mental exhaustion. In addition, the higher the student's score in the study stress questionnaire, the higher the student's score in the study burnout questionnaire. The study showed that grade differences and gender differences did not significantly affect the results.

Correlation study show that LP and LB are significantly positively correlated; in other words, they are closely related, and the more LP there is, the more severe the LB.

A similar conclusion is drawn from Liao's research. In order to examine the connection between LP and LB, this study used two middle schools (senior one through senior three) to administer an offline questionnaire survey. According to this study, the two have a highly complicated relationship; for instance, there is inconsistent evidence linking various aspects of stress to LB [5].

This study takes middle and high school students from two ordinary middle schools in Neijiang City, Sichuan Province, China as the research objects, and 50% of the students in each grade are randomly selected. A recovery rate of 97.12% was achieved from the 381 questionnaires that were distributed and the 371 that were gathered. There were 353 valid questionnaires in totality. There were nearly equal numbers of questionnaires for high and middle schools, as well as for males and females.

There are three sections to this questionnaire survey. Students' baseline circumstances are surveyed in the first section, followed by surveys of their LP and LB in the second as well as the third portion, respectively. The student's sex, age, family structure, birth order, residence, parents' occupation, and educational attainment constitute the cornerstone of their fundamental data. The study stress questionnaire is divided into five dimensions: task pressure, frustration pressure, competition pressure, expectation pressure and self-development pressure. The questionnaire was divided into 5 times, ranging from 1-5 points. The higher the score, the more pressure to study. The Cronbach α coefficient of the whole questionnaire is 0.95, which has a good confidence level. Students' LB questionnaire is divided into four dimensions: emotional exhaustion, physiological exhaustion, alienation between teachers and students, and low learning efficiency. The higher the scores of emotional exhaustion, physiological exhaustion and teacher-student alienation, the higher the learning fatigue; The lower the study efficiency score, the higher the study fatigue. Internal consistency for each dimension. Cronbach α coefficient was: emotional exhaustion 0.88; Low learning efficiency 0.83; Alienation between teachers and students 0.76; Physiological exhaustion 0.70; The Cronbach α coefficient of the whole questionnaire was 0.90, indicating good reliability. In this study, SPSS16.0 was used for reliability analysis, descriptive statistics and regression analysis.

The results show that middle school students' LP is at a high level, which is mainly manifested in three aspects: expectation pressure, task demand pressure and competition pressure. LB is at the medium level, mainly manifested as low learning efficiency and physiological exhaustion. Grade disparity has a more noticeable impact on LB. The degree of LB increases with grade. In addition, acquiring stress is not much impacted by grade differences. Teachers' and students' alienation is also significantly impacted by gender disparities. Using regression analysis, it is discovered that the components of task demand stress and expectation stress in LP are predictive of LB and have a strong correlation with it. LB was comparatively unrelated to other aspects of LP. Studies indicate that the LB increases with task stress. Overload of tasks can make students feel tired. This view is consistent with Yang Fei's research, but to a certain extent, it can be expected that stress negatively correlated with LB, which is more inconsistent with Yang Fei's research. LPLBThis study suggests that only a certain degree of LP can lead to greater LB.

In summary, despite some discrepancies, the majority of academics agree that there is a significant and positive relationship between LP and LB, according to prior pertinent research. Thus, future research should examine how additional aspects of LP affect LB or whether there are variables that fall somewhere in between LB and LP.

3. The Relation between ASE and LP

In middle school, the stress to study gradually increases. Students' capacity to study will be somewhat impacted when the demand to learn increases [6]. The association between study pressure and ASE has garnered a lot of public notice since ASE is an essential skill for learning for middle school pupils [7]. Numerous studies have demonstrated a substantial correlation between learning strain and self-learning efficacy [8]. Furthermore, some researchers think that LP and ASE are negatively correlated, which means pupils who attended school who are more confident in their academic abilities are better equipped to control and progressively lessen learning strain. Conversely, students who have low ASE frequently struggle to handle the strain of learning, which leads to an increase in LP [9].

Zhu Xiaobin's research also supports this view. This study proceeded a questionnaire survey on students from four middle schools in Hangzhou, through random samplingLPASE [10]. A total of 674 valid questionnaires were obtained. Of these, 314 were women and 360 were men. 350 for middle school, 324 for high school. The sex ratio is about one to one, and the grade ratio is about one to one.

There are two scales related to this study, namely, the LP scale and the ASE scale. The five components of the LP scale comprise rivalry pressure, task demand pressure, expectation pressure, frustration pressure, and pressure for self-improvement. The exam consists of sixty-two questions, and the greater the score, the more significant the pressure. The 32-question ASE scale is split into two sections: fundamental ability and control. The more effective the study, the higher the score. Amos4.0 and SPSS13.0 were utilized in this investigation to examine the data connection.

The results of the study show that fundamental ability and control ability are significantly correlated negatively with learning load. This may indicate that students with high ASE actively adjust their study routines and increase on preparing to cope with the demands of learning. Furthermore, this study suggests a mediating mechanism between ASE and LP, such as the mediating function of ASE between LB and LP.

There are still limitations to this study. For example, the scale description in the paper did not report the results of the reliability analysis, and the study adopted a cross-sectional study method, which could not gain the precise relation of variables.

Chen Yongfeng and his colleagues also supported this view in related studies. They analyzed the relationship between LP and ASE by conducting a questionnaire survey on high school students in Nanqi No. 1 Middle School in Dali City, Yunnan Province, China [11]. This study believes that only moderate LP can maximize the potential of individuals. In order to help high school students manage their LP and learning status, this study aims to investigate the relationship between ASE and LP. 117 of the 119 questionnaires that were distributed were found. The efficiency was 94.87% and the recovery rate was 98.327%. There are 59 girls and 5 8 boys among them, making the sex ratio roughly 1 to 1. Fifty of them perform academically, while the remaining 67 attend cram schools. The study raised general confidence by taking into account how different class kinds affect individuals.

Instruments are the LP questionnaire and the ASE questionnaire. The self-efficacy of learning behavior and the self-efficacy of learning capacity are the two dimensions of the ASE the form. There are 22 questions in all, with twelve questions for each latitude. The questionnaire uses a 5-point scoring system. The ASE increases with the score. This questionnaire's C Robacha coefficient is zero. Confident. The study stress questionnaire used the 5-point scoring system and has 21 questions. The pressure increases with the score. The questionnaire's Cronbach α coefficient was 0. Be confident. The correlation study was conducted using SPSS11.5.

The results show that students with high self-evaluation pressure generally have lower ASE than students with low self-evaluation pressure. This study's correlation analysis reveals that ASE and LP are highly associated, whereas learning ability self-efficacy and LP are negatively correlated, which is more in line with Zhu Xiaobin et al. However, this study discovered a positive correlation between LP and self-efficacy of learning behavior. This means that when students are under more pressure, they will demand more self-learning behavior, and when the demand for learning behavior improves, the pressure will also increase, creating a positive cycle. The linked research by Zhu Xiaobin does not disclose this finding. Nonetheless, this study generally holds that ASE and LP are negatively correlated.

The limitation is that the number of people surveyed is too small and the group involved is too narrow.

This opinion receives additional backing by relevant study conducted in recent years by Mo Qinzhao. The research aims to investigate the connection between LP to learn how to successfully enhance academic performance and ASE [12]. This study takes students from grade 1 to Grade 3 in a middle school in Yulin, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region as the research object. In this study, stratified sampling method was used to randomly investigate 3 grades in junior middle school, including 1, 2 and 3 classes in each grade. A total of 500 questionnaires were sent out, 497 questionnaires were actually collected, of which 450 were valid. The grade distribution of the questionnaire is approximately one-to-one.

Two related scales were used in this study, namely the LP Scale and the ASE Scale. The LP scale contains four dimensions: parental pressure, self-pressure, teacher pressure and social pressure. There are 21 questions in total. The average correlation coefficient of internal reliability consistency of each dimension is 0.810; The Likert Formula 5-point self-rating scale is rated from 1 to 5 on a scale of "very consistent" to "completely consistent." The consistency coefficient of this study is 0.791, and the half-confidence coefficient is 0.757. It suggests that the dependability of the questionnaire is high. ASE has two dimensions: self-efficacy of learning behavior and self-efficacy of learning capacity. Prior research has shown that the scale is highly reliable. The scale used in this study has a half-confidence coefficient of 0.757 and an overall internal consistency coefficient of 0.791. This indicates that the study's findings are largely trustworthy. Correlation, regression, and descriptive statistical analysis of LP and ASE were performed in this study using SPSS26.0.

The findings indicate that junior middle school students have above-average levels of LP and ASE, and that variances in individual grade, gender, and class leadership might have a substantial impact on their connection. LP and self-efficacy of learning ability was discovered to be significantly correlated negatively through a correlation study. The self-efficacy of learning behavior was significantly inversely connected to other aspects of LP, with the exception that it was not significantly connected with self-stress. This opinion conflicts with Chen Yongfeng's research.

4. Conclusion

This study summarizes the relationship among LP and ASE as well as the effect of LP on LB. According to the research, there is a positive association between LP and LB, and LB rises as LP rises. That is to say, when students feel pressure to study, they will feel burnout. The greater the LP students bear, college students will have negative learning emotions, and vice versa. The less pressure there is, the more motivated students will be to complete their learning tasks. Some previous studies believe that some individuals may not be tired under certain LP, and the size of LP is related to students' own perception. Therefore, this study believes that different individuals' different perceptions of LP may lead to differences in results. Therefore, in the follow-up research, scholars should control the variable of students' perception. In addition, this study believes that schools should try to find teaching methods that allow students to avoid perceived LP, so as to effectively alleviate students' LB.

The study's results show a strong inverse relationship between LP and ASE, meaning that the more self-assured one is, the less pressured one is to learn. The findings of this study demonstrate that self-efficacy of learning ability is significantly impacted by LP. Students will really doubt their ability to learn when the pressure to learn is too intense to handle. Furthermore, by integrating earlier research, this study discovered that students with higher ASE experienced less LP and were therefore better equipped to handle it than students with lower ASE. Thus, this study demonstrates the reciprocal relationship between ASE and LP. Future studies should therefore look at the relationship between academic stress and ASE as well as the relationship between LP and ASE. According to the study's findings, schools ought to put more of an emphasis on fostering students' learning confidence than on their academic achievement. Future studies can determine whether academic stress or ASE is influenced by additional factors.