The bottleneck of existing research is that the deep interaction mechanism in the MOOC platform is imperfect, which makes it difficult to effectively promote learners' active participation and improve learning outcomes. This paper aims to deeply analyze how interactive design affects learners' engagement and learning outcomes by studying the relationship between the interactive mode of live courses in the MOOC platform and learners' interactive behavior. First, the Flanders Interaction Analysis System is used to code and quantify the teacher-student interaction behaviors in the live courses. Then, the interaction between teachers, teaching assistants, and "passers-by" in the live courses is observed in real time to capture the verbal communication and interaction methods in the classroom. Secondly, combining learner behavior data and learning feedback, regression analysis method is used to quantify the relationship between interactive behavior and learning effect, and to explore the correlation between learner behavior patterns and learning performance. Finally, the experiment takes multiple MOOC live courses as the subjects, and through comparative analysis of the impact of different interactive design strategies (such as interaction frequency, interaction form, interactive content, etc.) on learners' deep engagement, learning motivation and learning outcomes, puts forward effective interactive design optimization suggestions. Experimental data show that there is a significant positive correlation between deep interactive behavior in MOOC live courses and learners' participation and learning outcomes. The data also show that appropriate incentive mechanisms, such as interactive rewards and immediate feedback, can help further enhance learners' deep participation and enthusiasm.

Yanyun Guo. The Relationship between the Dissemination Mode of Live Courses on Online Education Platforms and Learners' Interactive Behavior: Taking "MOOC" as an Example. Frontiers in Educational Psychology (2025), Vol. 6, Issue 1: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.38007/JEP.2025.060101.

[1]Khan A N, Khan N A, Mehmood K. Exploring the relationship between learner proactivity and social capital via online learner interaction: role of perceived peer support[J]. Behaviour & Information Technology, 2023, 42(11): 1818-1832.

[2]Keskin S, Şahin M, Uluç S, et al. Online learners’ interactions and social anxiety: The social anxiety scale for e-learning environments (SASE)[J]. Interactive learning environments, 2023, 31(1): 201-213.

[3]Baba Rahim N. The interaction between teaching competencies and self-efficacy in fostering engagement amongst distance learners: A path analysis approach[J]. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction (MJLI), 2022, 19(1): 31-57.

[4]Quadir B, Yang J C, Chen N S. The effects of interaction types on learning outcomes in a blog-based interactive learning environment[J]. Interactive Learning Environments, 2022, 30(2): 293-306.

[5]Lee H Y, Cheng Y P, Wang W S, et al. Exploring the learning process and effectiveness of STEM education via learning behavior analysis and the interactive-constructive-active-passive framework[J]. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2023, 61(5): 951-976.

[6]Yousef A M F, Khatiry A R. Cognitive versus behavioral learning analytics dashboards for supporting learner’s awareness, reflection, and learning process[J]. Interactive Learning Environments, 2023, 31(9): 5460-5476.

[7]Lee J E, Chan J Y C, Botelho A, et al. Does slow and steady win the race?: Clustering patterns of students’ behaviors in an interactive online mathematics game[J]. Educational technology research and development, 2022, 70(5): 1575-1599.

[8]Martin F, Borup J. Online learner engagement: Conceptual definitions, research themes, and supportive practices[J]. Educational Psychologist, 2022, 57(3): 162-177.

[9]Barut Tugtekin E, Dursun O O. Effect of animated and interactive video variations on learners' motivation in distance Education[J]. Education and Information Technologies, 2022, 27(3): 3247-3276.

[10]Toscu S. Exploring classroom interaction in online education[J]. Education and Information Technologies, 2023, 28(9): 11517-11543.

[11]Lai J W M, De Nobile J, Bower M, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of the use of technology in education–validation with a cohort of global open online learners[J]. Education and Information Technologies, 2022, 27(7): 9877-9911.

[12]Spain R, Rowe J, Smith A, et al. A reinforcement learning approach to adaptive remediation in online training[J]. The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, 2022, 19(2): 173-193.

[13]Lan P S, Liu M C, Baranwal D. Applying contracts and online communities to promote student self-regulation in English learning at the primary-school level[J]. Interactive Learning Environments, 2023, 31(1): 468-479.