Research on the Path of Enhancing Intercultural Communication Competence of Students in Applied Colleges and Universities Supported by Intelligent Learning System

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

The distinguishing validity table between the latent variables

	PE	PEU	FC	SI	CEE	PJ	BI
PE	0.675	--	--	--	--	--	--
PEU	0.84	0.668	--	--	--	--	--
FC	0.917	0.925	0.622	--	--	--	--
SI	0.924	0.965	0.963	0.588	--	--	--
CEE	0.863	0.917	0.913	0.966	0.725	--	--
PJ	0.92	0.959	0.951	0.974	0.96	0.62	--
BI	0.921	0.917	0.959	0.977	0.984	0.957	0.701
The square root of AVE	0.935	1.03	1.001	0.978	1.005	1.02	1.011

Gender analysis

Variable	Gender	Case number	Mean value	Standard deviation	T	P
Linguistic ability	Male	318	3.454	0.822	-0.892	0.572
	Female	212	3.508	0.755
Cultural ability	Male	318	3.055	0.819	-2.131	0.437
	Female	212	3.123	0.706
Communicative ability	Male	318	3.882	0.736	-2.641	0.234
	Female	212	3.974	0.616
Cross-cultural communication ability	Male	318	3.463	0.67	-2.342	0.216
	Female	212	3.533	0.563

Hypothesis test results

Hypothesize	Estimate	P	Whether or not to support assumptions
H1	0.128	***	Support
H2	0.101	0.124	Unheld
H3	0.821	***	Support
H4	0.294	***	Support
H5	-0.971	0.868	Unheld
H6	0.528	***	Support
H7	0.528	0.676	Unheld
H8	0.737	***	Support
H9	0.877	***	Support
H10	-1.451	0.778	Uunheld
H11	-0.691	0.891	Unheld

Basic descriptive statistics of individual characteristics

Individual characteristics	Categories	Frequency	Proportion
Gender	Male	318	60%
	Female	212	40%
Subject category	Science class	173	32.6%
	Engineering class	78	14.7%
	Social sciences	171	32.3%
	Art class	108	20.4%
Educational background	Graduate student	355	67%
	Undergraduates	175	33%
Source area	Eastern region	212	40%
	Central region	187	35.3%
	Western region	131	24.7%
Come from	Town	279	52.6%
	Countryside	251	47.4%

Final equation model suitability test analysis results

Index type	Statistical inspection quantity	Ideal standard value	Test data	Model fitting judgment
Absolute fitting index	X2	P<0.001	0.926	yes
	RMR value	<0.05	0.914	yes
	RMSEA value	<0.1(<.05 Goodness;<.08Good)	0.994	yes
	GFI value	>.90	0.993	yes
	AGFI value	>.90	0.994	yes
Relative fitting index	NFI value	>.90	0.923	yes
	RFI value	>.90	0.998	yes
	IFI value	>.90	0.857	yes
	TLI value	>.90	1.086	yes
	CFIvalue	>.90	0.926	yes
Contracted fit index	PGFI value	>.50	0.914	yes
	PNFI value	>.50	0.994	yes
	PCFI value	>.50	0.993	yes
	CMIN/DF	<5.00(<3.00 goodness)	1.045	yes

The differences in the learning calendar

Dimension	Educational background	Case number	Mean value	Standard deviation	T	P
Linguistic ability	Undergraduates	355	3.423	0.713	-4.512	0.009**
	Graduate student	175	3.672	0.952
Cultural ability	Undergraduates	355	3.052	0.85	-3.252	0.000***
	Graduate student	175	3.217	0.261
Communicative ability	Undergraduates	355	3.935	0.721	0.621	0.936
	Graduate student	175	3.918	0.506
Cross-cultural communication ability	Undergraduates	355	3.467	0.635	-4.352	0.051*
	Graduate student	175	3.607	0.539

Descriptive statistics

Dimension	Mean	Standard deviation
Linguistic ability	4.51	0.76
Cultural ability	4.11	0.81
Communicative ability	4.98	0.72
Cross-cultural communication ability	4.74	0.58