Acceptance: 16/06/2026
Published: 04/07/2026
Abstract
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have expanded access to higher education through scalable, flexible, and technology-mediated learning environments. However, persistent concerns regarding learner engagement, motivation and low completion rates continue to challenge their effectiveness. This systematic literature review examines the behavioural principles and learning theories underpinning MOOC research, with particular emphasis on behaviourism and its contemporary extensions. Guided by the PRISMA 2020 framework, a structured search was conducted using Google Scholar as the primary database by publish or Perish 8 app. A total of 280 records were identified, of which sixteen peer-reviewed studies meeting predefined inclusion criteria were selected for qualitative analysis. The findings generated thirteen behavioural codes organised into five major themes: (1) behaviourist and reinforcement-driven learning, (2) self-regulated and self-directed learning behaviour, (3) social and constructivist learning behaviour, (4) motivational behaviour and engagement dynamics and (5) behavioural analytics and ethical behaviour. The review indicates that operant conditioning mechanisms such as immediate feedback, quizzes, badges and certification remain foundational in xMOOC design. At the same time, learner success is strongly associated with self-regulation, autonomy, intrinsic motivation and networked participation. Alignment with India’s SWAYAM platform reveals a predominance of reinforcement-driven and certification-oriented structures, with limited integration of social and adaptive learning analytics. The study concludes that MOOCs function as hybrid, multi-theoretical ecosystems requiring contextual adaptation to enhance engagement and retention.
Author Name:
Mr. Abhishek Kumar Maurya ; Dr. Anjali Bajpai
Pages:
521-536
DOI Number:
10.5281/zenodo.21185732
Reference
Agonács, N., & Matos, J. F. (2020). Are you ready? Exploring self-directed learning readiness in MOOCs. Education and Information Technologies, 25(3), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10054-1
Bai, Y.-Q., & Xiao, J.-J. (2023). The impact of cMOOC learners’ interaction on content production. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(7), 4464–4475. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1969955
Banihashem, S. K., & Macfadyen, L. P. (2021). Pedagogical design: Bridging learning theory and learning analytics. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 47(1), 1–23.
Baturay, M. H. (2015). An overview of the world of MOOCs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 427-433.
Chiang, F. K., Zhu, D., & Yu, W. (2022). A systematic review of academic dishonesty in online learning environments. Journal of Academic Ethics, 20(3), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-021-09413-3
Clark, R. E. (2004). The classical origins of Pavlov’s conditioning. Integrative Physiological & Behavioral Science, 39(4), 279-294.
Celina, H., Kharrufa, A., Preston, A., Comber, R., & Olivier, P. (2016). SOLE meets MOOC: Designing infrastructure for online self-organised learning with a social mission. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (pp. 484–496). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2901790.2901848
de Freitas, S. I., Morgan, J., & Gibson, D. (2015). Will MOOCs transform learning and teaching in higher education? Engagement and course retention in online learning provision. British journal of educational technology, 46(3), 455-471.
de Moura, V. F., de Souza, C. A., & Viana, A. B. N. (2021). The use of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in blended learning courses and the functional value perceived by students. Computers & Education, 161, 104077.
Dubosson, M., & Emad, S. (2015). The forum community, the connectivist element of an xMOOC. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 3(10), 680–690. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2015.031004
Dron, J., & Ostashewski, N. (2015). Seeking connectivist freedom and instructivist safety in a MOOC. Educación XX1, 18(2), 51–76. https://doi.org/10.5944/educXX1.18.2.13464
Egloffstein, M., Sahin, M., & Ifenthaler, D. (2023). Course Design Approaches and Behavioral Patterns in Massive Open Online Courses for Professional Learning. Online Learning, 27(4), 48-68.
Gamage, D., Perera, I., & Fernando, S. (2020). Exploring MOOC user behaviours beyond platforms. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(8), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.3991/IJET.V15I08.12493
Hew, K. F. (2016). Promoting engagement in online courses: What strategies can we learn from three highly rated MOOCs. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(2), 320–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12235
Hu, X., Liu, S., Xu, Z., & Xiao, G. (2016, September). Learning behaviour analytics and learning effect evaluation for learners based on MOOCs. In 2016 International Conference on Educational Innovation through Technology (EITT) (pp. 1-5). IEEE.
Kahan, T., Soffer, T., & Nachmias, R. (2017). Types of participant behaviour in a massive open online course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(6), 55–77. https://doi.org/10.19173/IRRODL.V18I6.3087
Knox, J. (2014). Digital culture clash: “Massive” education in the e-learning and digital cultures MOOC. Distance Education, 35(2), 164–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2014.917704
Knox, J. (2018). Learning with algorithms: From coding to the platform. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91911-0
Li, S., Du, J., & Sun, J. (2022). Unfolding the learning behaviour patterns of MOOC learners with different levels of achievement. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(22), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00328-8
Meng, C., Zhao, M., Pan, Z., Pan, Q., & Bonk, C. J. (2024). Investigating the impact of gamification components on online learners’ engagement. Smart Learning Environments, 11(47), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00336-3
Page, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021a). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372, n160. doi:10.1136/bmj.n160
Petronzi, D., & Hadi, M. (2016). Exploring the factors associated with MOOC engagement, retention and the wider benefits for learners. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i4.2331
PTI. (2025, May 2). Less than 4% students completed SWAYAM courses since 2017, reveals Parliamentary panel report; flags outdated content | Hindustan Times. Hindustan Times. https://www.hindustantimes.com/education/admissions/less-than-4-students-completed-swayam-courses-since-2017-reveals-parliamentary-panel-report-flags-outdated-content-101738752673459.
Rehfeldt, R. A., Jung, H. L., Aguirre, A. A., Nichols, J. L., & Root, W. B. (2016). Beginning the dialogue on the e-transformation: Behavior analysis’ first massive open online course (MOOC). Behavior Analysis in Practice, 9(1), 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40617-015-0102-Z
Shi, H., Zhou, Y., Dennen, V. P., & Hur, J. (2023). From unsuccessful to successful learning: Profiling behavior patterns and student clusters in massive open online courses. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 5509–5540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12010-1
Swayam Central. (n.d.-a). About SWAYAM. Retrieved September 19, 2025, from https://swayam.gov.in/about
Swayam Central. (n.d.-b). Framework for Universities to Conduct Examinations for SWAYAM Courses. Retrieved September 24, 2025, from https://swayam.gov.in/about_university
Tseng, S. F., Tsao, Y. W., Yu, L. C., Chan, C. L., & Lai, K. R. (2016). Who will pass? Analysing learner behaviours in MOOCs. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 11(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/S41039-016-0033-5
Wang, R., Cao, J., Xu, Y., & Li, Y. (2022, December). Learning engagement in massive open online courses: A systematic review. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 7, p. 1074435). Frontiers Media SA
Wu, B., & Zhang, C. (2016). Behavior and intention in MOOCs research. Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 119–124. https://doi.org/10.2991/AIIE-16.2016.119
Xia, X., & Qi, W. (2023). Learning behavior interest propagation strategy of MOOCs based on multi-entity knowledge graph. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 13349–13377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11719-3
Xie, L., & Wang, C. (2022). Why did they come back? Analysis of learning behaviour and motivation of repeat learners in cMOOCs. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2115079
Zheng, Q., Chen, L., Burgos, D. (2018). Innovative and Revolutionary Potential of MOOCs. In: The Development of MOOCs in China. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6586-6_3
Zhong, S. H., Li, Y., Liu, Y., & Wang, Z. (2017). A computational investigation of learning behaviours in MOOCs. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 25(5), 693-705.
Zhu, J. (2022). How behaviorism can help provide insight into MOOCs in the Chinese education market. Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 6(8), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.26689/jcer.v6i8.4281
Writer Name
Mr. Abhishek Kumar Maurya ; Dr. Anjali Bajpai
Pages
521-536
DOI Numbers
10.5281/zenodo.21185732
Our Social Networks
AD EDUXIAN Publication is dedicated to advancing educational research and providing innovative learning solutions. We offer a wide range of services including publishing, editing, design, and marketing to support authors and researchers in their academic and professional endeavors.
Never miss any important news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
