Researchers' Self-Efficacy as a Determinant of Their Commitment to Duties in Universities in Anambra State, Nigeria

,

. Their commitment to fulfilling their duties, including conducting research, teaching, and administrative responsibilities, is vital for the success and reputation of academic institutions. In the context of higher education institutions, the commitment and dedication of researchers play a crucial role in the advancement of knowledge, innovation, and overall academic excellence. Researchers are at the forefront of generating new knowledge, conducting groundbreaking studies, and contributing to the overall growth and development of universities (Bezuidenhout, 2019). Their commitment to their duties is influenced by various factors, one of which is their self-efficacy beliefs.
Self-efficacy refers to an individual's belief in their ability to perform tasks and accomplish goals successfully. Researchers' self-efficacy refers to their belief in their own abilities, skills, and competence to successfully engage in research activities, overcome challenges, and produce desired outcomes (Hitches, Woodcock & Ehrich, 2022;Adekunle & Madukoma, 2022;Azonuche & Nzuta, 2012). It reflects their confidence in their capacity to design and execute research projects, analyze data, draw meaningful conclusions, and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in their respective fields. Ibikunle and Ikonne (2023) noted that researchers with high self-efficacy are more likely to be motivated, persistent, and proactive in pursuing their research goals, while those with lower self-efficacy may experience self-doubt, hesitation, and reduced commitment to their research duties. Self-efficacy plays a crucial role in shaping researchers' behavior, performance, and overall success in their academic endeavors. In the realm of academia, researchers' self-efficacy can significantly impact their commitment to their duties and their overall professional engagement (Livinƫi, Gunnesch-Luca & Iliescu, 2021;Udem & Anaehobi, 2020). This study aims to investigate the relationship between researchers' selfefficacy and their commitment to duties in universities in Anambra State, Nigeria. Understanding this relationship is vital for universities to develop strategies and interventions that can enhance researchers' commitment and promote a thriving academic environment.
Researchers' commitment to their duties refers to their dedication, responsibility, and accountability towards fulfilling their roles and responsibilities as academic researchers. It encompasses their commitment to conducting high-quality research, disseminating findings, fulfilling teaching obligations, and actively engaging in scholarly activities. Committed researchers demonstrate a strong work ethic, discipline, and a sense of professional obligation to contribute to their field of study (Ghazinejad, Hussein, & Zidane, 2018). They prioritize meeting research deadlines, delivering research outputs, and actively participating in academic and professional communities. Researchers' commitment to their duties drives their productivity, fosters a positive research culture, and contributes to the advancement of knowledge and the overall success of universities and academic institutions. Researchers' commitment to their duties is a critical factor in the success of higher education institutions (Azonuche, 2015;Loyarte-López, García-Olaizola, Posada, Azúa, & Flórez-Esnal, 2020). However, there is a need to explore the underlying determinants of researchers' commitment, particularly in the Nigerian context. Anambra State, with its numerous universities, provides an ideal setting to investigate this relationship and understand the factors that contribute to researchers' commitment levels.
Despite the recognized importance of self-efficacy and commitment among researchers, limited research has specifically examined the relationship between researchers' self-efficacy and their commitment to duties in universities in Anambra State, Nigeria. Understanding this relationship is crucial for academic institutions in the region to develop effective strategies to enhance researchers' commitment and effectiveness in their roles. This study's findings will contribute to the existing body of knowledge on researchers' commitment and self-efficacy in the Nigerian higher education context, specifically in Anambra State. The study will provide valuable insights into the factors influencing researchers' commitment levels and the role of self-efficacy in shaping their professional engagement. The findings will be beneficial to university administrators, policymakers, and stakeholders involved in the development and implementation of strategies to enhance researchers' commitment to duties. By understanding the relationship between self-efficacy and commitment, universities can create a supportive environment that fosters researchers' professional growth and productivity.

Research Objectives
The main objective of this study is to examine the relationship between researchers' self-efficacy and their commitment to duties in universities in Anambra State, Nigeria. The specific objectives include: 1. To assess the levels of self-efficacy among researchers in universities in Anambra State. 2. To examine the levels of commitment to duties among researchers in universities in Anambra State. 3. To determine the relationship between researchers' self-efficacy and their commitment to duties in universities in Anambra State.

Research Questions
To guide the study, the following research questions will be addressed: 1. What are the levels of self-efficacy among researchers in universities in Anambra State? 2. What are the levels of commitment to duties among researchers in universities in Anambra State? 3. What is the relationship between researchers' self-efficacy and their commitment to duties in universities in Anambra State?

II. Research Methods
The study employed a descriptive survey research design, utilizing a survey technique and a questionnaire to collect quantitative data. The participants of the study were lecturers from both federal and state universities in Anambra State, Nigeria. In Anambra State, there is one federal university called Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka (UNIZIK), offering a wide range of undergraduate and postgraduate programs. Additionally, there is a state university known as Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University, Uli (formerly Anambra State University of Science and Technology, Uli), which has multiple campuses and provides undergraduate and postgraduate programs. These universities were chosen due to their contributions to educational development and advancement in Anambra State, including their academic offerings, research activities, and opportunities for higher education.
The sample size for the study comprised 200 lecturers, selected using a simple random sampling technique. To collect data, a cross-sectional survey questionnaire consisting of three clusters and twelve items were developed. The questionnaire was distributed electronically through email and social media platforms using Google Forms, ensuring a cost-effective means of reaching respondents from different locations. The respondents expressed their perceptions by responding to statements and selecting answers on a 4-point Likert scale. The questionnaire underwent face validation by three experts to ensure its validity, with necessary corrections made based on their feedback. The internal reliability of the questionnaire was assessed using Cronbach's coefficient alpha (α), resulting in a value of 0.77, indicating acceptable reliability for the study.
Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the demographic characteristics of the participants. Bivariate correlational analyses, specifically Pearson product moment correlations, were conducted to examine the relationship between researchers' self-efficacy and their commitment to duties. A significance level (p-value) of 0.05 was used in the analysis. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 22, computing the mean and standard deviation. Items with mean scores of 2.5 and above were considered as accepted, while those below 2.5 were deemed not perceived by the respondents and were subsequently rejected. The interpretation of the findings was based on the data analysis, leading to the drawing of conclusions from the results.  Table 1 shows the demographic information of the respondents used for the study. It shows the gender and academic rank of the researchers used for the study with their sample size and percentage respectively. All the 200 questionnaires administered were found to be useful. 38.5% of the respondents are male while the remaining 61.5% are female. The academic rank of the researchers showed that 18% of the respondents are assistant lecturers, 23.5% lecturer I, 49% senior lecturer, and 9.5% associate professor. According to Table 2, the entire disclosures mean showed a moderate level. For skills and abilities to carry out high-quality research (M = 2.05, SD = 1.09), 17.5% respondents strongly agreed, 10% agreed, 32.5% disagreed and 40% strongly disagreed. For the statement ability to design and execute research studies effectively. (M = 2.95, SD = 1.23), 52.5% respondents strongly agreed, 7.5% agreed, 22.5% disagreed and 17.5% strongly disagreed. For ability to analyze research data and draw meaningful conclusions (M = 3.30, SD = 1.00), 62.5% respondents strongly agreed, 12.5% agreed, 17.5% disagreed and 7.5% strongly disagreed. "Communicating my research findings to both academic and non-academic audiences" (M = 3.58, SD = 0.89), 77.5% respondents strongly agreed, 10% agreed, 5% disagreed and 7.5% strongly disagreed. For ability to secure research funding and grants (M = 1.90, SD = 1.17), 17.5% respondents strongly agreed, 12.5% agreed, 12.5% disagreed and 57.5% strongly disagreed. "Ability to publish research articles in reputable journals." (M = 3.13, SD = 1.09), 55% respondents strongly agreed, 15% agreed, 17.5% disagreed and 12.5% strongly disagreed. The mean level of statements was in between 1.90 to 3.60. On the whole items 2, 3, 4 and 6 have a mean score above 2.50 and were accepted with standard deviation of 1.23, 1.00, 0.89 and 1.09 were accepted respectively. While item 1 and 5 having mean scores below 2.50 were rejected. According to Table 2, the entire disclosures mean showed a moderate level. For conducting high-quality research in my field of expertise (M = 2.90, SD = 1.16), 45% respondents strongly agreed, 17.5% agreed, 20% disagreed and 17.5% strongly disagreed. For the statement "I prioritize meeting research deadlines and deliverables" (M = 3.20, SD = 1.12), 60% respondents strongly agreed, 15% agreed, 10% disagreed and 15% strongly disagreed. For opportunities for collaboration with other researchers and scholars (M = 2.43, SD = 1.07), 22.5% respondents strongly agreed, 20% agreed, 35% disagreed and 22.5% strongly disagreed. "I am dedicated to mentoring and guiding students in their research endeavors" (M = 2.39, SD = 0.94), 14.5% respondents strongly agreed, 27.5% agreed, 40% disagreed and 18% strongly disagreed. For disseminating my research findings through publications and presentations (M = 3.26, SD = 0.95), 57.5% respondents strongly agreed, 15.5% agreed, 22.5% disagreed and 4.5% strongly disagreed. For participation in research-related activities such as conferences, workshops, and seminars (M = 3.03, SD = 1.23), 55% respondents strongly agreed, 15% agreed, 7.5% disagreed and 22.5% strongly disagreed. The mean level of statements was in between 1.90 to 3.60. On the whole items 7, 8, 11 and 12 have a mean score above 2.50 and were accepted with standard deviation of 1.16, 1.12, 0.95 and 1.23 were accepted respectively. While item 9 and 10 having mean scores below 2.50 were rejected. The correlation coefficients captured in table 3 indicate the strength and direction of the linear relationship between the two variables being studied. The Pearson correlation coefficient, often denoted as "r," is a statistical measure that quantifies the strength and direction of the linear association between two continuous variables (Baak, Koopman, Snoek, & Klous, 2020). It ranges from -1 to +1. A value of -1 indicates a perfect negative linear relationship, 0 indicates no linear relationship, and +1 indicates a perfect positive linear relationship. In this case, both correlation coefficients (-.668) have a negative sign, indicating a negative linear relationship between researchers' self-efficacy and commitment to duties. This means that as researchers' self-efficacy increases, commitment to duties tends to decrease, and vice versa. The magnitude of the correlation coefficient (-.668) indicates a moderate negative relationship between the variables. Alsaqr (2021) pointed out that correlation coefficients only measure the strength and direction of the linear relationship between variables, hence, they do not imply causation. Therefore, in the context of the study, these correlation coefficients provide insights into the association between researchers' self-efficacy and commitment to duties, but they do not establish a cause-and-effect relationship. The negative correlation between researchers' self-efficacy and commitment to duties suggests that as researchers perceive themselves to be more capable and confident (higher self-efficacy), they may be less motivated or committed to their duties. Several factors could potentially explain this relationship. In line with this finding, Hitches, Woodcock, and Ehrich (2022) upheld that researchers with high self-efficacy might feel less pressure to perform well or might be more selective in their commitments due to their perceived competence. On the other hand, researchers with low self-efficacy might feel more obligated to prove themselves and demonstrate commitment to their duties.

Discussion of Findings
Research question 1 sought to find out the levels of self-efficacy among researchers in universities in Anambra State. The study found that most lecturers are confident in their ability to analyze research data and draw meaningful conclusions. Collaborating this finding, Wang and Rashid (2022) noted that lecturers, with their extensive education, expertise, and research experience, typically exhibit a high level of confidence in analyzing research data and drawing meaningful conclusions. Through rigorous training in research methodologies and statistical analysis, coupled with their subject-matter knowledge, researchers possess the skills to navigate complex datasets and interpret findings accurately (Dawadi, Shrestha, & Giri, 2021). Engaged in research activities, they continually refine their analytical abilities, enabling them to draw connections, identify patterns, and provide insightful interpretations. This confidence according to Adekunle and Madukoma (2022) stems from their deep understanding of their disciplines, allowing them to approach data analysis with competence, ultimately contributing to the advancement of knowledge in their fields. The respondents also believe they can effectively communicate their research findings to both academic and non-academic audiences. Cartono and Novianty (2021) believed that lecturers are skilled communicators who can effectively convey their research findings to both academic and non-academic audiences. Most researchers has extensive knowledge and expertise enable them to distill complex research concepts into accessible language, making it understandable to diverse audiences (Merga & Mason, 2021). They adapt their communication style, employing clear and concise explanations, visual aids, and real-world examples to engage and connect with listeners. Lecturers understand the importance of bridging the gap between academia and the general public, ensuring that their research findings are disseminated effectively, thereby contributing to knowledge transfer, public awareness, and societal impact.
Research question 2 dealt with the levels of commitment to duties among researchers in universities in Anambra State. the results showed that researchers in Anambra state universities prioritize meeting research deadlines and deliverables. This outcome is collaborated by Akintobi, Wilkerson, Rodgers, Escoffery, Haardörfer, and Kegler (2016) who observed that most researchers in universities prioritize meeting research deadlines and deliverables due to the significance of timely completion in the academic and scientific communities. These deadlines are crucial for securing funding, publishing research papers, and contributing to academic progress. Researchers understand that adhering to deadlines demonstrates professionalism, commitment, and accountability (Antes, Kuykendall, & DuBois, 2019). Ultimately, meeting research deadlines and deliverables enhances researchers' credibility, promotes collaboration, and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in their respective fields. The study also found that most researchers are committed to disseminating their research findings through publications and presentations. Most researchers recognize the importance of sharing their work with the scientific community and society at large. By publishing their findings in peerreviewed journals, researchers contribute to the existing body of knowledge and engage in scholarly conversations (Bezuidenhout, 2019). Presentations at conferences and seminars allow them to showcase their research, receive feedback, and foster collaborations. Dissemination enhances their visibility and reputation in the academic community while promoting the advancement of their field (Luiselli, Bird, Maguire, & Gardner, 2023). Moreover, it ensures that their research has a broader impact, reaching other researchers, policymakers, and the public, ultimately driving innovation and societal progress.
Research question 3 covered the relationship between researchers' self-efficacy and their commitment to duties in universities in Anambra State. Correlation analysis indicated a negative linear relationship between researchers' self-efficacy and commitment to duties. A negative linear relationship between researchers' self-efficacy and commitment to duties suggests that as self-efficacy decreases, commitment to duties also diminishes. This implies that researchers who lack confidence in their abilities may struggle to fully engage in their responsibilities and exhibit lower commitment levels (Mason & Merga, 2022). Decreased self-efficacy according to Ibikunle and Ikonne (2023) could result in reduced motivation, decreased productivity, and a lack of persistence in accomplishing tasks. Conversely, higher self-efficacy often corresponds to greater commitment, as researchers with a strong belief in their capabilities are more likely to tackle challenges, invest effort, and fulfill their duties diligently. Understanding this negative relationship is crucial for supporting researchers' self-efficacy to promote higher commitment and overall effectiveness (Na-Nan, Kanthong & Joungtrakul, 2021;Udem & Anaehobi, 2020).

IV. Conclusion
In conclusion, the study on researchers' self-efficacy as a determinant of their commitment to duties in universities in Anambra State, Nigeria sheds light on the intricate relationship between self-efficacy and commitment among academic researchers. The findings indicate a negative linear relationship between researchers' self-efficacy and their commitment to duties. As self-efficacy decreases, commitment levels also diminish. The study underscores the importance of self-efficacy in influencing researchers' dedication and engagement in their responsibilities. Researchers with low self-efficacy may face challenges in fully committing to their duties, potentially impacting their productivity and performance. Conversely, higher self-efficacy levels tend to correlate with greater commitment, as researchers with strong belief in their capabilities demonstrate increased motivation and persistence in fulfilling their obligations.
These findings emphasize the significance of supporting researchers' self-efficacy through various means such as providing training, mentorship, and resources to enhance their confidence and competence. Strengthening researchers' self-efficacy can lead to higher levels of commitment and effectiveness in their roles, thereby positively impacting the research output and overall success of universities in Anambra State. Further research and interventions focused on nurturing self-efficacy among researchers are warranted to promote a culture of commitment and excellence in academic institutions. By fostering a positive and empowering environment that nurtures researchers' self-efficacy, universities can enhance their productivity, advance knowledge, and contribute to the broader development of Anambra State and beyond.

Recommendations
Based on the study findings regarding researchers' self-efficacy as a determinant of their commitment to duties in universities in Anambra State, Nigeria, the following recommendations are suggested: 1. Enhance self-efficacy development programs: Universities should design and implement training programs that focus on building researchers' self-efficacy. These programs can include workshops, seminars, and mentoring initiatives aimed at improving researchers' confidence in their skills, knowledge, and abilities. By providing resources and support, universities can empower researchers and enhance their commitment levels. 2. Foster a positive and supportive research culture: It is essential to create a conducive environment that nurtures researchers' self-efficacy and commitment. Encouraging collaboration, fostering positive relationships between researchers, and promoting a culture of recognition and appreciation for their work can enhance their confidence and motivation. This can be achieved through regular research forums, networking events, and opportunities for interdisciplinary collaborations.
3. Provide adequate resources and support: Universities should ensure researchers have access to the necessary resources, such as funding, equipment, and research facilities. Adequate support in terms of administrative assistance, research grants, and technical assistance can alleviate potential barriers and increase researchers' commitment to their duties. 4. Implement mentoring programs: Establishing mentoring programs that pair experienced researchers with early-career researchers can significantly impact self-efficacy and commitment levels. Mentors can provide guidance, support, and role modeling, helping researchers overcome challenges and develop confidence in their abilities. 5. Continuously evaluate and assess self-efficacy levels: Universities should periodically assess researchers' self-efficacy levels to identify areas of improvement and provide targeted interventions. This can be done through surveys, interviews, or self-assessment tools, allowing for tailored support and interventions to boost self-efficacy and commitment. 6. Promote research collaborations and interdisciplinary projects: Encouraging researchers to engage in collaborative and interdisciplinary research projects can contribute to their self-efficacy and commitment. Such projects expose researchers to diverse perspectives, knowledge exchange, and enhanced problem-solving skills, thereby bolstering their confidence and dedication.