individual differences in second language acquisition

C H A P T E R 2 6

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN SECONDLANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Jean-Marc Dewaele

I. INTRODUCTION

Human beings are both similar and unique. They belong to the same species, whichmeans they share the same anatomy, and yet they vary enormously within certainparameters. While many individual differences (IDs) are highly visible, others can onlybe inferred through systematic observation of behavior. One common observation isthat some people seem to be better at learning and using second languages than others.The intriguing question is why? Traditional ID researchers tried to pin down internalcharacteristics of a person as the cause of the observed differences. A more dynamicperspective is emerging that acknowledges the complexity of second languageacquisition (SLA). Internal characteristics may play a role, but only in interactionwith the context. People are never in the same context from the start and their previoushistories shape their future trajectories. The aim of this chapter is to provide anoverview of the emerging answers to that single question from different strands ofresearch into IDs in SLA. The epistemological and methodological diversity in IDsresearch in SLA has too often been described in terms of opposition and conflict(nature vs. nurture, quantitative vs. qualitative, etic vs. emic). The latest trends in IDsresearch indicate a growing consensus about the situated and dynamic nature of SLA.Brains, like fingerprints, are unique. The reasons for this uniqueness are both genetic

and epigenetic (Schumann, 2004). However, contrary to fingerprints, brains keepchanging and adapting through a lifetime. This plasticity means that within anatomic,physiological, and genetic limits, skills and behavior can change. It also means that aperson’s actions affect the shape and the connections in that person’s brain. A strikingillustration of this phenomenon was provided by Maguire, Woollett, and Spiers (2006).The researchers discovered that black-cab drivers in London have a greater graymatter volume in the posterior hippocampus (i.e., the store for spatial memories)compared to control subjects, and the longer they had been on the job, the larger thegray matter volume. This difference is attributed to constant use and updating ofspatial representations. The changes to the brain of second language (L2) learners maybe less spectacular, but they seem real nonetheless. Mechelli et al. (2004) foundincreased gray matter density in the left inferior parietal region of the brain of

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45

623

The New Handbook of Second Language Acquisition Copyright r 2009 by Emerald Group Publishing LimitedAll rights of reproduction in any form reserved

bilinguals compared to monolingual controls. This particular region has been shownby functional imaging to become activated during verbal-fluency tasks.To recapitulate, it thus seems that the brains of individuals starting to learn an L2

are different from each other, that the learning process will cause a physical change tothe brains, and that IDs in the neural substrate may be responsible for IDs in the rateof development of the L2, in levels of fluency in the first language (L1) and the L2 and,finally, in ultimate linguistic attainment.

II. ON VARIANCE AND INVARIANCE

Feldman Barrett recently defined the goal of human psychology as the discovery of‘‘the scientifically viable constructs or categories that will characterize what is variantand invariant in the working of the human mind’’ (2006, p. 35). One could rephrasethis definition for the investigation of language acquisition, that is, the search forscientifically viable constructs or categories that will characterize what is variant andinvariant in the acquisition and use of language. Linguists in the Chomskyan traditionmay favor what is invariant in language (i.e., common to all human minds), whilesociolinguists typically focus on what is variant (i.e., ‘‘human minds reliably differfrom one another, and how a mind functions differently in different situations’’Feldman Barrett, 2006, p. 36; see also Preston and Bayley, this volume). SLAresearchers who are typically also foreign language teachers will know from experiencethat equal exposure to a foreign language will not result in equal levels of competencein the L2. They may therefore be more interested in the causes of this variation in orderto manipulate them and stimulate the development of the foreign language.The present chapter will propose a short overview of IDs research in SLA in its

widest sense. The first part will discuss some general issues and concerns in the field.The second part will present factors that have been linked to IDs in SLA. The factorshave been grouped according to their status as ‘‘learner-internal,’’ that is, intrinsicabilities and personality dimensions, a combination of learner internal and learnerexternal factors, and purely ‘‘learner-external’’ factors. Given the constraints of space,some typical IDs variables such as learning styles and learning strategies have beenleft out.

III. INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES RESEARCH IN SLA: THE QUEST FOR

THE HOLY GRAIL?

Psychologists working in the field of IDs refer to personality dimensions shared byall people, but where every individual occupies a specific position on a dimension. Thisbiological source of IDs interacts with social factors resulting in specific behavior forevery individual. The idea that particular behaviors, dictated by underlying personalitydimensions, are more conducive to the learning of foreign languages seems intuitivelyappealing. Indeed, it is easy to imagine the model foreign language learner: a good

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45

624 Jean-Marc Dewaele

communicator with an excellent memory, eager and motivated, talkative and studious,creative and courageous, inclined both to take risks and to be cautious. Yet, manyapplied linguists who have set out to identify the sources of IDs in SLA have comeback from a long journey with relatively little to show. There are many reasons whythis quest for the sources of IDs in SLA has turned into a kind of search for the Grail.Researchers, like Arthur’s knights, stumbling through the night, guided by a stubbornbelief that something must be there, glimpsing tantalizing flashes of light from adistance, only to discover that their discoveries looked rather pale in the daylight AU :1. Partof the difficulty of investigating IDs in SLA is that the topic is highly interdisciplinaryand requires a considerable amount of theoretical knowledge and methodologicalskill: a thorough understanding of the independent variables is necessary (personalityand educational psychology, social psychology), as well as a good grasp of thedependent variables (applied linguistics, educational psychology, sociolinguistics,psycholinguistics).So far, nobody has yet come up with the Grand Unified Theory of Individual

Differences. One possible reason for this is that IDs are still conceptualized as largelylearner-internal and that there cannot be one unified theory of something one-sided.As Pavlenko pointed out (personal communication), we are not even sure we will everhave a unified theory of Factors Mediating Second Language Learning Outcomes.

IV. FACTORS THAT HAVE BEEN LINKED TO IDS IN SLA

A. Learner-Internal Factors: Ability

Language Learning Aptitude

Gardner (2006) writes about ‘‘ability’’ (both intelligence and language aptitude) asone of the two primary ID variables involved in language learning (the other one beingmotivation). Gardner predicts that learners with higher levels of ability will be moresuccessful language learners (2006, p. 241). For neurobiologists, variation in abilitiesand aptitudes are caused by differences in physical and chemical structures of the brain(Schumann, 2004, p. 9). However, the hypothesis has not yet been empiricallydemonstrated. The definition of the concept of language aptitude and its link withintelligence has evolved over the years. Skehan (1989) defined language-learningaptitude as a ‘‘talent for learning languages that is independent of intelligence’’(p. 276). Dornyei and Skehan (2003) revised Skehan’s earlier definition of language-learning aptitude dropping the link with intelligence and inserting a reference to IDs:language-learning aptitude is a ‘‘specific talent for learning [ . . . ] languages whichexhibits considerable variation between learners’’ (p. 590). In a recent paper, Dornyei(2006) wondered whether such a thing as ‘‘language aptitude’’ actually exists, andwhether it is just a number of cognitive factors making up a composite measure thatcan be referred to as the learner’s overall capacity to master a foreign language (p. 46).This description comes quite close to Gardner’s general term of ‘‘ability.’’One hotly debated issue in this research area is the possible link between L1 learning

aptitude and L2 learning aptitude. Skehan (1989) found a significant positive

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45

26. Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition 625

correlation between the rate of L1 acquisition in young children and their performancein L2 acquisition at age 13. Skehan (1989) argues that this is evidence of an innateaptitude for languages. Could this capacity to learn an L2 be related to an individual’sL1 learning skills, and could the L2 learning difficulties be linked in part to L1difficulties? This is the hypothesis put forward by Sparks & Ganschow, 1991; Sparks,Javorsky, Patton, & Ganschow, 1998). An individual’s language aptitude would belinked to a single factor, namely ‘‘linguistic coding’’ which refers to L1 literacy skills.These abilities would be fundamental for learning an L2, and an insufficient level ofdevelopment in linguistic coding skills would limit the ultimate attainment in the L2.In a recent study, Dewaele (2007a) found that language grades obtained by high schoolstudents for the first language were highly correlated with their grades in the second,third, and fourth languages. These higher scores in language classes could be linked tocognitive or social factors, or a combination of both. In the former perspective onecould argue that some participants had higher levels of verbal intelligence, in the latterperspective one could argue that the higher scores were the consequence of a richliteracy home environment.Miyake and Friedman (1998) have suggested that capacity in working memory

(WM) is the central component of language aptitude. They point to the literatureshowing a link between IDs in L1 WM capacity, and both L2 WM capacity and L2language comprehension skills. A higher WM capacity was also found to stimulate L2acquisition. Their own empirical study with native speakers of Japanese who wereadvanced learners of English showed that a higher WM capacity is linked to theacquisition of appropriate linguistic cues and better comprehension of complexsentence structures in the L2 (1998, p. 361). The role of attention and attentionalcapacity in the development of the L2 has been the object of intense research(Robinson, 2003). Robinson defined language aptitude as the sum of lower-levelabilities (aptitude complexes), which can be grouped into higher-order cognitiveabilities (e.g., noticing the gap) and stimulate SLA in various learning contexts (seealso the chapters by Gor and Long, and by Pica in this edition).Sternberg (2002) agrees that memory and analytic abilities play an important role

in SLA, but only in combination with creative and practical abilities, constituting‘‘successful intelligence.’’ Success depends on the match between instructional con-ditions and pattern of abilities. In other words, ‘‘when students are taught in a waythat fits how they think, they do better at school’’ (2002, p. 34).Other abilities may play a role in SLA. Musical ability has been found to predict

accuracy in perception and production of L2 sounds (Slevc & Miyake, 2006).

B. Learner-Internal Factors: Personality Traits

Extraversion–Introversion

This dimension, described by Eysenck (1967), is the first one of the ‘‘Giant 3’’. It hasbeen described as ‘‘a truly psychological concept, slotting in between phenomena at thebiological and social levels and providing an explanatory link between them’’ (Wilson,1977, p. 213). Eysenck (1967) suggested that variation on this dimension is biologicallybased: extraverts are underaroused, introverts overaroused. As people operate ideally

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

, 2001

jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

with a moderate level of cortical arousal, extraverts compensate for their suboptimalarousal levels by tending toward activities that involve greater sensory stimulation.Because introverts have higher baseline levels (tonic) of cortical arousal as well as morereactivity (phasic) to individual stimuli than extraverts, they do not need this externalstimulation and will thus rather try to avoid overarousing situations. Introverts reachtheir tolerance levels much faster when exposed to strong stimuli. The extraverts’ lowautonomic arousability and the insensitivity to punishment signals make them morestress-resistant.Psychological studies have consistently showed that extraverts are superior to

introverts in short-term memory (STM) and WM (Lieberman, 2000). The causes forthe reported differences in STM capacity/efficiency between introverts and extravertsare of a neurochemical nature. Introverts have higher levels of the neurotransmitterdopamine (the neurochemical precursor for norepinephrine). Stress releases extradopamine, which might push them over the very narrow range of optimal innervationin the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and impair performance. Lieberman andRosenthal (2001) argue that both dopamine and norepinephrine affect the functioningof the prefrontal cortex following an inverted U-pattern: ‘‘to little or too much ofeither norepinephrine or dopamine disrupts attentional and working memoryprocesses’’ (Lieberman & Rosenthal, 2001).Applied linguists and educationalists have focused their attention on the possible

effect of extraversion on success in L2 learning, the expectation being that the moretalkative extraverted learners would have a natural advantage in the acquisition of theforeign language compared to their more introverted peers. However, studies whereextraversion scores were correlated with language test scores revealed inconsistentresults. In their overview of applied linguistic research that had included extraversionas an independent variable, Dewaele and Furnham (1999) concluded that the results‘‘varied in how the personality trait was measured (i.e., self-report vs. others’ ratings),the language that was being learnt, the nationality of the learners but most importantlywhich language variables were measured and how’’ (p. 523).One striking finding was that researchers who had investigated the link between

extraversion scores and measures based on written language found little no significantcorrelations. The most influential study in this area was Naiman, Frohlich, Stern,and Todesco (1978). The authors had hypothesized that extraversion might be acharacteristic of the ‘‘good language learner.’’ They collected written data fromCanadian high school students learning French as L2. Contrary to their expectationsthey failed to find a correlation between extraversion and test scores, and questionedthe construct validity of the introversion/extraversion dimension (Naiman et al., 1978,p. 67). This particular observation seriously tainted the reputation of the extraversionvariable (Dewaele & Furnham, 1999).However, extraversion scores have been found to correlate positively with measures

of oral fluency in the L2, especially in stressful situations (Dewaele & Furnham, 2000).One possible explanation for this argued that the heavier reliance on declarativeknowledge in L2 production requires an important amount of STM capacity(Dewaele, 2002b). This could cause an STM overload in introvert L2 users in stressfulsituations. As a result, fragments of linguistic information would have to queue,resulting in slower processing and speech production.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

o

jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

or

jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

is

jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

The extraverts’ inclination to take risks seems to extend to linguistic behavior:extravert L2 learners tend to use more colloquial words than their more introvert peers(Dewaele, 2004). Extraverts were also found to use more emotion words in their L2production, which suggests they were less reluctant to talk about potentially more‘‘dangerous’’ emotion-laden topics (Dewaele & Pavlenko, 2002). MacIntyre andCharos (1996) found that introvert L2 learners suffered more from foreign languageanxiety (FLA) and were less willing to communicate in their French L2 than theirextravert peers. van Daele (2007) on the other hand, did not find a link betweenextraversion and FLA.Marin-Marin (2005) found very few significant relationships between extraversion

and vocabulary learning strategies or vocabulary test results from Mexican EFLlearners. However, a small subgroup of introverts obtained significantly higher end-of-semester English grades than a group of extraverts (2005, p. 273). MacIntyre, Clement,and Noels (2007) looked at the effect of learning situation on vocabulary test scoresof introvert and extravert Canadian French L2 learners. Introverts were found toperform best after having studied in a very familiar situation, while the extravertsperformed best in conditions involving a moderate degree of novelty (p. 296). Theresearchers also found an interaction between person and situation in trait willingnessto communicate (trait WTC), which showed that extraverts are not always morewilling to communicate.Oya, Manalo, and Greenwood (2004) investigated the relationship between

personality variables of Japanese students and their oral performance in English. Theparticipants were native speakers of Japanese who were studying English in NewZealand. No significant correlations emerged between extraversion and oral fluency,accuracy, and complexity. However, extraverts produced better global impressionsduring their oral performance. Some significant effects of extraversion were uncoveredby van Daele, Housen, Pierrard, and Debruyn (2006) in their longitudinal study on thedevelopment of fluency, complexity, and accuracy of Dutch-speaking secondaryschool students’ L2 English and French in Flanders. Extraversion scores were foundto be positively correlated with lexical complexity in both foreign languages, but withneither accuracy nor syntactic complexity at the first data collection point. The effectof extraversion faded over the following year. The author suggests that this may be amethodological artifact, namely that the extraverts grew bored with the task over timeand made less of an effort (2006, p. 227).Finally, Dewaele (2007) found negative, but nonsignificant, correlations between

extraversion and language grades in the Dutch L1, French L2, English L3, andGerman L4 of Flemish high school students.

Neuroticism–Emotional Stability

Neuroticism (N) AU :2is the second factor of the ‘‘Giant 3’’ (Eysenck, 1967). People whoscore high on this scale tend to suffer from ‘‘anxiety, phobia, depression andhypochondriasis’’ (Furnham & Heaven, 1998, p. 326). Those with low scores can bedescribed as calm, contented, and unemotional. Williams (1971) administered abattery of personality and language tests to Anglophone students who had beendivided into three groups according to their participation in the classroom: active,

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

intermediate, or nonparticipation. The group of nonparticipating students had thehighest scores on insecurity and neuroticism, and the lowest scores on self-esteem andintellectual productivity. There is every reason to believe that this relation holds for theforeign language class. Dewaele (2002a) found a link between neuroticism and FLA inhis study on Flemish learners of French and English (cf., infra). However, neuroticismdid not correlate with foreign language grades (Dewaele, 2007a).

Psychoticism

Psychoticism (P) AU :3is the third major personality domain in Eysenck’s model andmeasures tough-mindedness (Furnham & Heaven, 1998, p. 230). It is seen as beingcomposed of Agreeableness and Conscientiousness in the ‘‘Five Factor Model.’’Persons scoring high on psychoticism scale ‘‘tend to be hostile, cold, aggressive, andhave poor interpersonal relations’’ (p. 327). Furnham and Medhurst (1995) found thatindividuals with low scores on the psychoticism scale were more likely to have goodoral and written expression, were more motivated, and participated more actively inseminars. Dewaele (2002a) also found that high-P Flemish learners AU :4of English L3suffered less than low-P participants from FLA in English (cf. infra). One explanationput forward was that a higher level of hostility is linked to a more limited concernabout the reaction of the interlocutor(s) to one’s speech production in the foreignlanguage, hence a lower level of FLA for the speaker. Dewaele (2007a) found that hisFlemish who scored high on psychoticism tended to have lower grades in French L2,but not in Dutch L1, English L3, or German L4.

Conscientiousness

Conscientiousness is associated with striving for persistence, self-discipline, andachievement AU :5(Busato, Prins, Elshout, & Hamaker, 2000), all of which may be logicallyexpected to increase a learner’s success in SLA. Wilson (2008) found that openuniversity students enrolled in French L2 who scored higher on Conscientiousness—measured through the OCEAN Personality Assessment—were more likely to completethe course successfully.

Openness to Experience

Openness encompasses aspects of intellectual curiosity, creativity, imagination, andaesthetic sensibility. Individuals with high scores on Openness would have ‘‘a greaterpredisposition to engage in intellectually stimulating activities that lead to higherknowledge acquisition’’ (Furnham & Chamorro-Premuzic, 2006, p. 81).This dimension is similar to ‘‘Open-mindedness,’’ which refers to an open and

unprejudiced attitude toward out-group members and toward different cultural normsand values (van der Zee & van Oudenhoven, 2001). According to van der Zee and vanOudenhoven (2002) AU :6, individuals in a foreign context who show an interest in localpeople are likely to be exhibiting open-mindedness: it also necessitates a degree offreedom from prejudice toward out-group members. Young (2007) found that open-mindedness was a good predictor of foreign language learning achievement.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Replacement Text

psychoticism

jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Replacement Text

psychoticism

jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

the

jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

participants

jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Replacement Text

characteristics

jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

courses

Emotional Intelligence

In the last few years, emotional intelligence (EI) has been the object of intensiveresearch in personality psychology. The construct of EI posits that ‘‘individuals differin the extent to which they attend to, process, and utilize affect-laden information ofan intrapersonal (e.g., managing one’s own emotions) or interpersonal (e.g., managingothers’ emotions) nature’’ (Petrides & Furnham, 2003, p. 39). Trait EI is measured viaself-report questionnaires and is located at the lower levels of personality hierarchies(Petrides & Furnham, 2003). In a recent study, Dewaele, Petrides, and Furnham (2008)investigated the link between levels of trait EI and levels of communicative anxiety(CA) in the L1, L2, L3, and L4 of adult multilinguals. A significant negative relation-ship emerged between trait EI and CA in the different languages. This was interpretedas an indication that participants with higher levels of trait EI are better at regulatingstress levels and emotional reactions in communicative interactions. The capacity toexpress oneself clearly, and the ability to read an interlocutor’s emotional state willlead to lower levels of CA. What remains to be investigated is whether higher levels oftrait EI could also be an advantage in long-term L2 development.

C. Interaction of Learner-Internal and Learner-External Variables

Social, Educational, and Political Contexts

MacIntyre, Clement, Dornyei, and Noels (1998) have demonstrated that individualcontexts are inextricably linked to social contexts, that is, the intergroup climate inwhich interlocutors evolve. Research into IDs need to take into account all enduringinfluences (e.g., intergroup relations, learner personality, gender, social class) whichrepresent ‘‘stable, long-term properties of the environment or person that would applyto almost any situation’’ (1998, p. 546).The importance of the context can be illustrated through a few simple examples.

Students from countries like France, Poland, Hungary, or China realize that tosucceed and compete in the global market they have to be proficient in at least oneforeign language, because the rest of the world does not speak their language. Inofficially multilingual countries like Belgium or Canada, state employees are expectedto master at least two of the national languages. They may not be overly enthusiasticabout this requirement, given some antagonisms between the linguistic groups.However, since getting a job or obtaining promotion typically depends not only onthe mastery of the second official language but also on the knowledge of English,and preferably some fourth or fifth language, students understand that they have nochoice.The situation is radically different in the United States or the United Kingdom

where there is no market pressure for foreign language learning. It is not surprisingtherefore that not even half of 15- to 24-year olds in the United Kingdom reportedhaving working knowledge of an L2, and that nearly 40% declared no interest inlearning an L2. These results stand in sharp contrast with those from other EUcountries where interest in foreign language learning is much higher (European Reporton the Quality of School Education, 2001). The implication of this finding is that whilelearner-internal variables would mediate the outcomes of individual learners, their

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


effect on overall levels of foreign language achievement in the society at large wouldundoubtedly pale compared to the effects of social and political contexts shapinglanguage prestige and marketability.

Cultural and Intergroup Empathy

Cultural Empathy (CE), one of the five subscales of the Multicultural PersonalityQuestionnaire1 (MPQ), refers to the ability to clearly project an interest in others, aswell as to reflect a reasonably complete and accurate sense of the thoughts, feelings,and experiences of members of a different cultural group (van der Zee & vanOudenhoven, 2001). Young (2007) found that the MPQ’s CE subscale was highlypredictive of language learning ability and achievement of learners of English from 30different nationalities. He also developed a new subscale called ‘‘Intergroup CulturalEmpathy’’ in which 13 items from the original CE scale of the MPQ were transformedto make them more specifically about empathy toward members of a different culturalgroup. This new subscale was slightly better at predicting both number of languagesspoken and self-rated linguistic ability (Young, 2007).

International Posture

A relatively similar construct to Young’s Intergroup Cultural Empathy wasproposed by Yashima (2002), namely International Posture, which was based onNorton’s (2001) concept of ‘‘imagined community.’’ Included in the concept areinterest in foreign or international affairs, willingness to go overseas to stay or work,and a readiness to interact with intercultural partners. It thus reflects students’ desireto join an ‘‘imagined international community.’’Yashima (2002) used structural equation modeling with a sample of Japanese

university students enrolled in an EFL program in the United States. She found thatinternational posture, hypothesized as a latent variable, predicted motivation, which,in turn, significantly predicted proficiency in English. A significant path also emergedbetween international posture and willingness to communicate in L2 English. Laterstudies showed that Japanese students who studied abroad acquired a higher levelof international posture (Yashima, Zenuk-Nishide, & Shimuzu, 2004; Yashima &Zenuk-Nishide, 2008).

Communicative Anxiety and Foreign Language Anxiety

In their exploratory study of the relations between language anxiety and otheranxieties in speaking English as L1 and French as L2, MacIntyre and Gardner (1989)found two different anxiety dimensions: ‘‘General Anxiety’’ and ‘‘CommunicativeAnxiety’’, respectively. Only the latter was found to be negatively correlated withFrench L2 vocabulary recall.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

451The other subscales are open-mindedness, emotional stability, flexibility, and social initiative.


jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

2000,

jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

Yashima, 2009;

The authors later considered CA, of which FLA is a specific manifestation, as ‘‘astable personality trait, among experienced language learners’’ (MacIntyre & Gardner,1994, p. 297). The authors define CA as a feeling of tension and apprehension linked toL2 speech production and reception. Performance in the L1 was not linked to levelsof CA in that language (1994, p. 301). One possible explanation for this is that L1production and reception is typically largely automatized, based on implicit knowl-edge, hence requiring relatively little STM capacity. L2 production and reception, aswas pointed out earlier, puts much more strain on the STM. Moreover, Dewaele(2002b) argued that the effect of introversion on the catecholamine system is similarto that generated by anxiety. Anxiety seems to be linked to levels of norepinephrine,which also seems to affect the capacity and/or efficiency of the STM. Excessive levelsof dopamine and norepinephrine impair performance. Introverts have been found tobe more anxious, which could further reduce the available processing capacity of WM(Gershuny, Sher, Rossy, & Bishop, 2000).The cumulated effects of both introversion and anxiety could seriously affect fluency

in L2 production. CA tends to co-occur with high stress, STM overload, andbreakdown in automatic processing. Dewaele (2002b) compared the situation to a firespreading through an overstretched airport control center. The combination of highanxiety and high introversion thus seems to reinforce the effects on speech productionin the L2, especially in stressful interpersonal situations.Reviews of the literature on FLA conclude that a moderate negative relationship

exists between FLA and various measures of language achievement (Horwitz, 2001).However, van Daele’s (2007) longitudinal study on the effects of psychologicalvariables on the SLA of English and French by Dutch L1 students showed differentialeffects of FLA on both languages, and a lack of stability in its effects: FLA correlatednegatively with lexical richness in English and French, and positively with grammaticalaccuracy in English at the start of the study. FLA was not significantly linked to lexicaland grammatical accuracy in French, nor to syntactical complexity or fluency in bothforeign languages. Interestingly, the effects were strongest for English, the languagefor which participants reported lower levels of FLA than French. The effects of FLAcompletely disappeared at the last data collection point after 22 months.Dewaele (2002a) also demonstrated that patterns of interindividual variation in

levels of FLA were quite different in the French L2 and English L3 of Flemish highschool students. Participants from lower social classes were found to suffer morefrom FLA in French, but not in English. This social effect appeared to be a strongerpredictor of FLA in French than that of the global personality traits. Psychoticism,extraversion, and, to a lesser extent, neuroticism, did however significantly predictlevels of FLA in English L3 production. Extraverts, high-P, and low-N participantsreported lower levels of FLA in English and French where it was nonsignificant.Rodriguez and Abreu (2003) examined general foreign language classroom anxietyconstruct in English and French and found them to be stable across the foreignlanguages. They suggest that levels of FLA may be linked to motivation, culture, andaptitude.Dewaele and Thirtle (to appear) found that FLA was linked to the decision of

dropping further foreign language study among 14-year-old students in a Londonschool.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

psychoticism

jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Replacement Text

neuroticism

jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Replacement Text

2009

Sparks et al. (1998) have suggested that variation in language skills in the L1 (e.g.,reading, vocabulary) may be linked to variation of FLA levels. Individuals with adeficit in the L1 would consequently suffer more from FLA.Pavlenko (2005) has argued that SLA researchers should not overemphasize FLA

in classroom contexts. She points out that the more serious FLA is the one that occursoutside the classroom, when the L2 users encounter real threats, when they arediscriminated against and need to stand up for themselves.Dewaele et al. (2008) heeded Pavlenko’s call for more FLA research in authentic

interactions and investigated the relationships between levels of FLA reported by adultmultilinguals and psychological and sociobiographical factors. The main finding wasthat participants with higher levels of trait EI suffered less from CA in the L1 and lessfrom FLA in the L2, L3, and L4. This was interpreted as evidence that self-confidencein one’s ability to read the emotional state of an interlocutor lowers one’s FLA.Participants who started learning the L2 and L3 at a younger age tended to suffer lessfrom FLA. Purely classroom-based language instruction was found to be linked tohigher levels of FLA compared to instruction that also involved extracurricular use ofthe language. A higher frequency of use, a stronger socialization in a language, a largernetwork of interlocutors, and a higher level of self-perceived proficiency in a languagewere also linked to significantly lower levels of FLA. The authors conclude that FLA islinked to a myriad of interacting psychological, situational, cultural, and social factors.

Language Attitudes

Gardner (1985) defined attitude as ‘‘an evaluative reaction to some referent orattitude object, inferred on the basis of the individual beliefs or opinions about thereferent’’ (1985, p. 9). His socioeducational model of L2 acquisition is generallyconsidered to be the seminal research paradigm for investigating the role of attitudesand motivation in SLA. It focused on the link between attitudes toward the learningsituation, integrativeness, and motivation. Attitudes toward foreign languages havebeen found to be shaped by different sociocultural, historical, and political factors, aswell as by purely didactic and personal factors (MacIntyre et al., 2007). These attitudesare the crucial antecedent of motivation to learn a language. Some languages soundsexy and attractive to the ears of potential learners AU :7. Piller (2002) coined the term‘‘language desire’’ to describe the attraction for speakers of English. In her study oflinguistic practices of bilingual couples, Piller (2002, p. 269) notes that someparticipants were in love with English or German as an L2 long before they actuallymet their partners. However, languages may have completely different effects ondifferent people. Natasha Lvovich wanted to become ‘‘a woman’’ when she first heardher teacher speak French (Lvovich, 1997). For the American academic RichardWatson, French sounded ‘‘syrupy’’ and ‘‘effeminate’’ and a language that ‘‘Real Men’’would not speak (Pavlenko, 2005, p. 67). He learned to read French very well, butattributed his limited success in speaking it to his attitude toward the language(Pavlenko, 2005).Attitudes toward foreign languages in general are not as stable as some early studies

have seemed to suggest. This error originated from the fact that most early SLAresearch into attitudes considered a single foreign language (typically French L2 in the

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


Canadian context). However, recent studies have shown that learners may havewidely different attitudes toward the different foreign languages they are studying(Gardner & Tremblay, 1998). Lasagabaster (2005) considered the attitudes ofuniversity students toward three languages (i.e., Basque, Spanish, and English).He found that participants showed a very positive attitude toward English and towardtheir own L1 (Basque or Spanish). The Spanish L1 participants had more favor-able attitudes toward English than those with Basque as L1. Dewaele (2005a) analyzedattitudes toward French L2 and English L3 among Flemish high school students.Attitudes toward English were found to be much more positive than those towardFrench, despite the fact that the participants had enjoyed a longer and more intenseformal instruction in French. Participants who felt more Flemish (i.e., their regionalidentity) than Belgian displayed more negative attitudes toward French. This negativeattitude toward French is the result of tense socio-political relations between Dutchand French speakers in Belgium. Higher levels of self-perceived competence, higherfrequency of use of the target language (TL), and lower levels of CA were found tocorrelate positively with attitudes toward the TLs.

Language Learning Motivation

Language learning motivation has been one of the most intensely investigatedvariables in SLA (cf. Gardner, 2006; Dornyei, 2005; Dornyei & Ushioda, 2009;Lasagabaster & Huguet, 2006; Masgoret & Gardner, 2003; Noels, 2003; Ushioda,2008). Yet, motivation remains ‘‘one of the most elusive concepts in the whole ofsocial sciences’’ (Dornyei, 2001, p. 2). It could be described as a complex, compositeconstruct, with some components that are more trait-like and others that are morestate-like and situation-specific (Dornyei, 2006, p. 50). Motivation is supposed toexplain why people opt for certain actions, and how long and how hard they arewilling to go on with certain activities (Dornyei and Skehan, 2003, p. 614).According to Gardner (1985), levels of motivation are influenced and maintained

by attitudes toward the learning situation and integrativeness, that is, ‘‘an openness tothe TL group and other groups in general linked to one’s sense of ethnic identity’’(Gardner, 2006, p. 236). Motivation can also be supported by instrumentality, that is,‘‘conditions where the language is being studied for practical or utilitarian purposes’’(2006, p. 249).Research has shown stronger correlations between the level of integrativeness and

SLA outcomes and somewhat weaker relationships between the level of instrumen-tality and foreign language measures (Dornyei, 2001; Gardner, 2006).In his recent work, Dornyei has suggested leaving the term ‘‘integrative’’ completely

behind and focusing more on the identification aspects and on the learner’s self-concept (Dornyei, 2005). An individual imagines an ‘‘Ideal L2 Self,’’ which is therepresentation of all the attributes that that person would like to possess, includingthe mastery of an L2. Dornyei also postulates a second dimension, the ‘‘Ought-to L2Self,’’ that is, the attributes that one believes one ought to possess. L2 motivation canthen be defined as the desire to reduce the perceived discrepancies between the learner’s

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43


actual self and his/her ideal or ought-to L2 selves (Dornyei, 2006, p. 54). The thirddimension is labeled ‘‘L2 Learning Experience,’’ which concerns situation-specificmotives related to the immediate learning environment and experience. Dornyeiponders about the interface of the Ideal L2 Self and the actional phase of motivation.He refers to Norton’s (2001) concept of ‘‘imagined communities’’ agreeing with herthat learners’ motivation will relate to both real and imagined belongings withincommunities of practice (Dornyei, 2006, p. 54).Autobiographies by bilinguals contain numerous illustrations of the effect of

imagination on individuals’ motivation to learn an L2. Lvovich, for example, eventhough she resided in the Soviet Union, created an imaginary French identity forherself. She immersed herself in different aspects of both popular and ‘‘high’’ Frenchculture, learned to speak with a Parisian accent, and even dipped ‘‘the imaginedcroissant into coffee’’ (Lvovich, 1997, p. 2).Ushioda (2001) and Shoaib and Dornyei (2005) have focused on motivational

change over time or ‘‘emergent motivation’’ (Ushioda, 2009). Ushioda (2001)identified a number of sources of IDs in Irish learners’ motivation to learn French.She found that successful learners engaged in intrinsic motivational processesmore often, reminding themselves about their past and future successes and theiraspirations. Less successful learners focused more on external incentives and blamedfactors beyond their control for their lack of progress.Shoaib and Dornyei (2005) identified a number of salient recurring temporal

patterns and episodes in the participants’ lives that transformed their motivationaldisposition.

Age of Onset of Acquisition

The debate on the Critical Period Hypothesis is still going strong (see DeKeyser &Larson-Hall, 2005, Munoz, 2006; Singleton & Ryan, 2004; Birdsong, this volume).Paradis (2004) has argued that CP effects are caused by the decline of proceduralmemory for late L2 learners, which forces them to rely on explicit learning insteadof implicit learning. The upper age limit is thought to be variable according to thecomponent of the implicit language system that is being acquired through exposure tolanguage interaction. This is, in chronological order, prosody, phonology, morphol-ogy, and syntax (Paradis, 2004, p. 59). There seems to be broad agreement in theSLA community that there are ‘‘general age factors’’ (Singleton & Ryan, 2004),but there is disagreement on the existence of cutoff points and on the effect ofconfounding variables. Birdsong (2005), for example, rejects the idea of ‘‘critical’’period or maturational milestones, arguing that the decline in attained L2 proficiencyis progressive rather than decisive and is spread over the age spectrum (2005, p. 125).In a recent study, Trofimowich and Baker (2006) found that Korean adult naturalisticlearners’ age at the time of first extensive exposure to English L2 (all in their 20s)was negatively linked to fluency measures. Dewaele (2007b) found similar patternsin a large-scale study of adult multilinguals. Participants who started learning English(as an L2) at a younger age rated their oral proficiency much higher than late starters.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Replacement Text

v

Residence in TL Country: Contact with the TL

Research on immersion education and study abroad has shown that increasedcontact with the L2 typically boosts the acquisition of different areas of the L2,including sociolinguistic competence (Mougeon, Rehner, & Nadasdi, 2004; Regan,2005), sociopragmatic competence (Kinginger, 2004), and grammatical competence(Howard, 2005; Nadasdi, Mougeon, & Rehner, 2003). However, as Kinginger (2008)pointed out, study abroad may create the potential for rapid SLA, but it is insufficientin itself.Yashima et al. (2004) showed that frequency and amount of L2 communication by

Japanese students who participated in a study abroad program in the United Statesrelated to satisfaction in the sojourn experience, and satisfaction in friendship withhosts. A higher perceived quality of human relationship with host family members waslinked to more interest in intercultural communication and/or international affairs.This in turn motivated students to put in more effort in learning the L2, which led to afurther improvement in communicative skills and self-confidence.Trofimowich and Baker (2006) found that length of residence (ranging from a few

months to more than 10 years) had no significant effect on fluency measures in theEnglish L2 in a group of adult Koreans. Only one suprasegmental, stress timing,correlated with amount of experience in the L2.Dewaele (2007b) found that self-rated proficiency scores in English L2 from his

adult multilinguals were linked to the amount of authentic interaction in English L2both during the learning phase (on average 25 years before data collection) and at thetime of data collection.

Pedagogical Context

The language teacher’s personality, ideology, and pedagogical approach clearlyaffects the learners’ attitudes and motivation toward the TL (Dornyei, 2001; Gardner,1985), although not always in the expected direction. Pavlenko (2003) refers to herown experience in a Ukrainian school in 1975, when as a fifth grader she chose herforeign language, English, and attended her first class where their teacher welcomedthem with a passionate speech explaining to them that the knowledge of English wouldbe crucial in the event of a war with the West and the students would need theirlinguistic skills to help defeat the enemy. Pavlenko asked to be transferred to theFrench class where the teacher was politically more relaxed and where she maderapid progress.The progress of an L2 learner could be linked between the chemistry that develops

between the learner, the group of learners, and the their teacher. Borg (2006)investigated the specific traits exhibited by effective language teachers. One crucial traitwas ‘‘an ability to communicate freely and to radiate positive feeling’’ (2006, p. 23). Anability to develop close relationships with students was also reported as a particulartrait shared by effective language teachers (Borg, 2006). This finding reflects theconclusion of an earlier study on effective teachers of all subjects, namely theirability to create a caring emotional environment (Walls, Nardi, von Minden, &Hoffman, 2002).

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Replacement Text

v

V. IDS RESEARCH IN SLA: OBSTACLES AND DIFFICULTIES

A. IDs Research and Teaching Implications

While it undoubtedly makes sense to investigate the link between personality traitsand language learning, one could wonder what Naiman et al’s (1978) ultimate goalwas. Had they been able to draw the psychological profile of the ‘‘good languagelearner,’’ would this have had an effect on educational practices? Knowing that highscores on traits X or Y correlate with higher marks in the foreign language classroomis one thing, but what can the teacher do with that knowledge? Since personality traitsare stable, they cannot be manipulated in any way. Should therefore potentiallanguage learners with low scores on certain personality dimensions be discouragedfrom enrolling? Should they be segregated and taught separately? This would rest onthe very shaky assumption that a more efficient teaching method could be developedfor this particular group. Schumann (2004) points out that because of IDs betweenlearners, there is no ‘‘right way’’ to teach an L2: ‘‘brains vary, and therefore, peoplelearn differently’’ (2004, p. 19). The author concludes that since there is no singlemethod for teaching an L2 that can guarantee similar progress and uniform outcomesamong learners, good teachers should simply provide ‘‘general guidelines anddirection’’ (2004, p. 19).No single personality trait has ever been shown to be a systematic and significant

predictor of success in SLA. It remains to be seen whether this is the result ofmethodological difficulties in measuring ‘‘success’’ or whether success in SLA is justindependent of personality traits. This is a fascinating question. Indeed, psychologicalresearch has shown that personality traits do affect complex cognitive performance,and since L2 production can be considered to be a complex cognitive task, IDs inproduction could be expected to be correlated with personality traits. Of course, thereare complicating factors. Firstly, SLA typically lasts many years, which means itcannot easily (if at all) be replicated in laboratory conditions. Secondly, SLA and L2production are both linked, but they are also independent. In other words, a slowlearner is not necessarily also a slow speaker. Conversely, a fast learner is notautomatically a fluent speaker. Obviously the amount of learning will affect the easewith which the L2 is produced. Mastery of morphology, for example, will depend onthe grammar rules that the learner will have developed. The problem of previouslyacquired knowledge and its effect on performance makes IDs research in SLA muchmore difficult than in cross-sectional psychological studies where participants aretypically required to perform a complex task (e.g., sorting cards) while somebackground variable is manipulated (e.g., noise level).

B. Learners are More than Bunches of Variables

It has been argued that looking at an individual in terms of variables and neuronsdoes not do justice to the uniqueness and richness of that individual’s behaviorand achievement. The argument comes not from neurobiologists working on SLA,some of whom include language learner autobiographies in search of longitudinalevidence (Schumann & Wood, 2004), but from postmodernist researchers.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


Vygotskian sociocultural theorists see L2 learners as intentional human agents whoplay a defining role in shaping the qualities of their learning but who, at the same time,may be subject to variable positioning within specific settings and relations of power(Kinginger, 2008; Lantolf & Pavlenko, 2001; Lantolf and Poehner, this volume).Rejecting simplistic explanations of complex phenomena in SLA, socioculturaltheorists adopt an emic perspective, that is, they take the perspective of participantsconsidering them to be crucial witnesses of their own learning process, and uselongitudinal case studies to understand differences in language learning achievement.Kinginger (2008), for example, argues that variation in outcomes resulting from studyabroad are not necessarily attributable only to the events or conditions characterizingthe experience itself. Instead, she found links between outcomes and participants’life histories, aspirations, commitment, and self-image (Kinginger, 2004, 2008).IDs researchers acknowledge that a purely etic and quantitative approach does not‘‘do full justice to the subjective variety of individual life’’ (Dornyei, 2001, p. 193).In his defense of a mixed epistemological approach, Dewaele (2005b) has argued

that L2 learners are more than a bunch of variables, but that it is perfectly legitimateto look at them in those terms too. Such an approach allowed Dewaele (2008) toinvestigate IDs in 1459 adult multilinguals’ perceptions of the emotional weight of thephrase ‘‘I love you’’ in their L1 and L2. Almost half of the participants felt ‘‘I loveyou’’ was strongest in their L1, a third felt it to be equally strong in their L1 and L2,and a quarter felt it to be stronger in their L2. Quantitative analyses showed thatthe perception of weight of the phrase ‘‘I love you’’ was significantly associated withself-perceived language dominance, context of acquisition of the L2, age of onsetof learning the L2, degree of socialization in the L2, nature of the network ofinterlocutors in the L2, and self-perceived oral proficiency in the L2. An analysis ofparticipants’ comments revealed idiosyncratic variation linked to unique linguistic andcultural trajectories, identity issues, and metapragmatic awareness of the conceptualdifferences in emotion scripts of love in different languages.

C. The Need for Context

Postmodernist researchers have also criticized the idealized and decontextualizednature of IDs research in SLA. The clear separation assumed in much SLA literaturebetween social factors and the individual or psychological factors is untenableaccording to Pavlenko (2002). She argues that many individual factors, such as age,gender, or ethnicity, are also socially constituted, so that the understanding andimplications of belonging to a particular ethnic group, generation, or gender are notthe same across communities and cultures. Pavlenko points out that seemingly internalfactors such as attitudes, motivation, or language learning beliefs have clear socialorigins and are shaped and reshaped by the social contexts in which the learners findthemselves.Dornyei (2006) notes that a growing number of IDs researchers accept the situated

nature of IDs variables. The notion that the various traits are context-independent andabsolute is slowly being replaced by ‘‘new dynamic conceptualizations in which IDfactors interact with the situational parameters rather than cutting across tasks andenvironments’’ (Dornyei, 2006, p. 62).

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

(cf. Pike, 1964)

D. The Rejection of Static Categories

One of the main objections of postmodernist researchers against quantitative IDsresearch in SLA is the acceptance of stable, static, and homogeneous categories.Pavlenko (2002) points out that the causal, unidirectional, and stable nature attributedto constructs as attitudes and motivation is problematic given the continuousinteraction between them. Initial success in SLA may strengthen a learner’smotivation, but a series of failures may result in a diminished learning motivation(2002, p. 280). Gardner (2006) addresses this criticism by pointing out that theschematic representation of his model is a static representation of a dynamic forwardmoving process that is capable of change at any given point in time. Achievement caninfluence motivation (p. 244), and language anxiety is both influenced by andinfluencing language achievement (p. 245).

E. The Danger of Oversimplification

Early IDs research in SLA often involved a single independent variable. Ackerman(2003) points out that isolated traits can have substantial impact on learning outcomes,but that combinations of traits could have more predictive power than traits inisolation (2003, p. 92). The danger with the exclusive focus on a single independentvariable is the irresistible temptation to attribute causality when significant relation-ships are uncovered (Ellis, 2006). It is crucial to remember that the relationshipmight in fact be influenced by other variables of which the researcher is unaware. Thedecision on the number of independent variables to include in a single study is adelicate balancing act, given that too many variables may overly complicate theresearch design and hamper the statistical analysis, while too few may give a limitedunderstanding of the complex interactions. One way forward is through the use of pathanalysis (e.g., MacIntyre & Charos, 1996), structural equation modeling (Csizer &Dornyei, 2005), or cluster analysis (Yashima & Zenuk-Nishide, 2008) where the effectof multiple independent variables can be estimated quite accurately.

F. The Limitations of Comparing Group Averages

SLA researchers who studied the effect of study abroad programs on developmentof the L2 have often been baffled by the amount of interindividual variation in theirdata (Howard, 2005; Regan, 2005). Because of an implicit assumption of homogeneityof the experimental and control groups, research designs tend to be overly simple: ittypically involves two groups of participants: those who leave the home institution tostudy in the L2 environment, and a control group who continue their languagestudy in the home university. Both groups are tested before departure of the first group(time 1), and tested again when they are reunited after a number of months (time 2).The averages for both groups on the same tests are compared at time 1 and time 2. Theexpectation is not to find significant differences between both groups at time 1, butany difference at time 2 is attributed to the treatment, namely the study abroad. Thedangerous assumption in such designs is that every individual in the group goesthrough a similar experience and displays similar behavior. Those who stay at home

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


are assumed not to seek extra exposure to the TL outside the language classes. Thosewho are abroad are assumed to constantly engage in interactions with native speakers.Both assumptions are intuitively appealing, but they do not correspond to reality. Infact, being abroad is only a potential cause for rapid development of the TL: somegrab the opportunity, other participants, as Kinginger (2008) shows, do the oppositeand avoid contact with TL speakers and the TL culture. The average performance ofthe study abroad group may be slightly higher than those who stayed at home(Howard, 2005), but some in the latter group may have made faster progress studyingtheir grammar and reading books in the TL at home. It is therefore important to shelvethe notion of the ‘‘monolithic prototypical faceless learner, whose identity is grossgroup averages’’ (Dewaele, 2005b, p. 367).

VI. CONCLUSION

What I hope to have demonstrated in the present chapter is that the study of IDs is avery large and vibrant research area, and that SLA research on IDs has benefited fromcrossfertilization from neighboring disciplines. The field has witnessed many heateddebates among researchers firmly defending their preferred epistemology andmethodology. Encouragingly, the debates seem to have spurred a clear evolution inthe field. The postmodernist view of the self as fluid and fragmented within acomplex social context seems to have exerted a noticeable influence on the field of IDsresearch. Recent research stresses the situated nature of independent variables andthe highly complex dynamic interactions between learner-internal and learner-external variables in SLA (Dornyei, 2005, 2006; Dornyei & Ushioda, 2009). Excitinglinks have been established between the neurological substrate (i.e., the brain) andthe behavior (and ultimate attainment) of foreign language learners and users. Thevalue of a combination of etic and emic perspectives is increasingly being recognized,with data from learners’ personal experiences being collected through interviews,autobiographies, diaries, in addition to the quantitative analysis of corpora andtraditional and holistic questionnaires (Kinginger, 2008; Lasagabaster, 2005;Pavlenko, 2005). Factors that previously tended to be ignored in IDs research, suchas the sheer sex appeal of some languages, the power of imagination, and therelationship with the teacher, have been incorporated in the list of potential variablesthat drive SLA. Crucially, IDs researchers have recognized that it would be a folly totry to understand the incredible complexity of SLA by simplistic research designs(MacIntyre et al., 2007).

UNCITED REFERENCES

Sparks & Ganschow (2001); van der Zee & van Oudenhoven (2000).

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


REFERENCES

Ackerman, P. L. (2003). Aptitude complexes and trait complexes. Educational Psychologist, 38,

85–93.

Birdsong, D. (2005). Interpreting age effects in second language acquisition. In J. F. Kroll &

A. M. D. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches

(pp. 109–127). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Borg, S. (2006). The distinctive characteristics of foreign language teachers. Language Teaching

Research, 10, 3–32.

Busato, V. V., Prins, F. J., Elshout, J. J., & Hamaker, C. (2000). Intellectual ability, learning

style, achievement motivation and academic success of psychology students in higher

education. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 1057–1068.

Csizer, K., & Dornyei, Z. (2005). The internal structure of language learning motivation: Results

of structural equation modeling. Modern Language Journal, 89, 19–36.

DeKeyser, R., & Larson-Hall, J. (2005). What does the critical period really mean? In J. F. Kroll

& A. M. D. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches

(pp. 88–108). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dewaele, J.-M. (2002a). Psychological and sociodemographic correlates of communicative

anxiety in L2 and L3 production. The International Journal of Bilingualism, 6, 23–39.

Dewaele, J.-M. (2002b). Individual differences in L2 fluency: The effect of neurobiological

correlates. In V. Cook (Ed.), Portraits of the L2 user (pp. 219–250). Clevedon:

Multilingual Matters.

Dewaele, J.-M. (2004). Individual differences in the use of colloquial vocabulary: The effects of

sociobiographical and psychological factors. In P. Bogaards & B. Laufer (Eds.), Learning

vocabulary in a second language: Selection, acquisition and testing (pp. 127–153).

Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Dewaele, J.-M. (2005a). Sociodemographic, psychological and politico-cultural correlates in

Flemish students’ attitudes toward French and English. Journal of Multilingual and

Multicultural Development, 26, 118–137.

Dewaele, J.-M. (2005b). Investigating the psychological and the emotional dimensions in

instructed language learning: Obstacles and possibilities. The Modern Language Journal,

89, 367–380.

Dewaele, J.-M. (2007a). Predicting language learners’ grades in the L1, L2, L3 and L4: The effect

of some psychological and sociocognitive variables. International Journal of Multi-

lingualism, 4(3), 169–197.

Dewaele, J.-M. (2007b). Interindividual variation in self-perceived oral communicative

competence of English L2 users. In E. Alcon Soler & M. P. Safont Jorda (Eds.), The

Intercultural speaker. Using and acquiring English in the foreign language classroom

(pp. 141–165). Berlin: Springer Verlag.

Dewaele, J.-M. (2008). The emotional weight of ‘I love you’ in multilinguals’ languages. Journal

of Pragmatics, 40, 1753–1780.

Dewaele, J.-M., & Furnham, A. (1999). Extraversion: The unloved variable in applied linguistic

research. Language Learning, 49, 509–544.

Dewaele, J.-M., & Furnham, A. (2000). Personality and speech production: A pilot study of

second language learners. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 355–365.

Dewaele, J.-M., & Pavlenko, A. (2002). Emotion vocabulary in interlanguage. Language

Learning, 52, 265–324.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


Dewaele, J.-M., Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2008). The effect of trait emotional intelligence

and sociobiographical variables on communicative anxiety among adult polyglots.

Language Learning, 58(4), 911–960.

Dewaele, J.-M., & Thirtle, H. (to appear). Why do some young learners drop foreign languages?

A focus on learner-internal variables. International Journal of Bilingual Education and

Bilingualism AU :8.

Dornyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and researching motivation. Harlow: Longman.

Dornyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner. Individual differences in second

language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Dornyei, Z. (2006). Individual differences in second language acquisition. AILA Review, 19,

42–68.

Dornyei, Z., & Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In

C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition

(pp. 589–630). Oxford: Blackwell.

Dornyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (Eds.). (2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol:

Multilingual Matters.

Ellis, R. (2006). Individual differences in second language learning. In A. Davies & C. Elder

(Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 525–551). Oxford: Blackwell.

European Report on the Quality of School Education (2001). European Communities, Brussels.

Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield: C. C. Thomas.

Feldman Barrett, L. (2006). Valence is a basic building block of emotional life. Journal of

Research in Personality, 40, 35–55.

Furnham, A., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2006). Personality, intelligence and general knowl-

edge. Learning and Individual Differences, 16, 79–90.

Furnham, A., & Heaven, P. (1998). Personality and social behavior. London: Arnold.

Furnham, A., & Medhurst, S. (1995). Personality correlates of academic seminar behavior:

A study of four instruments. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 197–208.

Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and

motivation. London: Arnold.

Gardner, R. C. (2006). The socio-educational model of second language acquisition: A research

paradigm. Eurosla Yearbook, 6, 237–260.

Gardner, R. C., & Tremblay, P. F. (1998). Specificity of affective variables and the trait/state

conceptualization of motivation in second language acquisition. In R. Agnihotri, A. L.

Khanna, & I. Sachdev (Eds.), Social psychological perspectives on second language

learning. New Delhi: Sage.

Gershuny, B. S., Sher, K. J., Rossy, L., & Bishop, A. K. (2000). Distinguishing manifestations of

anxiety: How do personality traits of compulsive checkers differ from other anxious

individuals? Behavior Research and Therapy, 38, 229–241.

Horwitz, E. K. (2001). Language anxiety and achievement. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,

21, 112–126.

Howard, M. (2005). On the role of context in the development of learner language: Insights

from the study abroad research. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics, 148, 1–20.

Kinginger, C. (2004). Alice doesn’t live here anymore: Foreign language learning and

renegotiated identity. In A. Pavlenko & A. Blackledge (Eds.), Negotiation of identities

in multilingual contexts (pp. 219–242). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Kinginger, C. (2008). Language learning in study abroad: Case studies of Americans in France.

Oxford: Blackwell.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Replacement Text

2009

jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

, 1747-7522, DOI 10.180/1367005080254965.

Lantolf, J., & Pavlenko, A. (2001). (S)econd (L)anguage (A)ctivity theory: Understanding

second language learners as people. In M. Breen (Ed.), Learner contributions to language

learning: New directions in research (pp. 141–158). London: Longman.

Lasagabaster, D. (2005). Bearing multilingual parameters in mind when designing a questionnaire

on attitudes: Does this affect the results? International Journal of Multilingualism, 2,

26–51.

Lasagabaster, D., & Huguet, A. (Eds.). (2006). Language use and attitudes towards multi-

lingualism in European bilingual contexts. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Lieberman, M. D. (2000). Introversion and working memory: Central executive differences.

Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 479–486.

Lieberman, M. D., & Rosenthal, R. (2001). Why introverts can’t always tell who likes them:

Social multi-tasking and non-verbal decoding. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 80, 294–310.

Lvovich, N. (1997). The multilingual self: An inquiry into language learning. Mahwah, NJ:

Erlbaum.

MacIntyre, P. D., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second

language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 3–26.

MacIntyre, P. D., Clement, R., & Noels, K. A. (2007). Affective variables, attitude and

personality in context. In D. Ayoun (Ed.), French Applied Linguistics (pp. 270–298).

Amsterdam: Benjamins.

MacIntyre, P. D., Clement, R., Dornyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness

to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern

Language Journal, 82, 545–562.

MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1989). Anxiety and second language learning: Towards a

theoretical clarification. Language Learning, 39, 251–275.

MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1994). The subtle effects of language anxiety on cognitive

processing in the second language. Language Learning, 44, 283–305.

Maguire, E. A., Woollett, K., & Spiers, H. J. (2006). London taxi drivers and bus drivers:

A structural MRI and neuropsychological analysis. Hippocampus, 16, 1091–1101.

Marin-Marin, A. (2005). Extraversion and the use of vocabulary learning strategies among

university EFL students in Mexico. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Essex.

Masgoret, A.-M., & Gardner, R. C. (2003). Attitudes, motivation, and second language

learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associates. In Z. Dornyei

(Ed.), Attitudes, orientations and motivations in language learning (pp. 167–210). Oxford:

Blackwell.

Mechelli, A., Crinion, J. T., Noppeney, U., O’Doherty, J., Ashburner, J., Frackowiak, R. S.,

et al. (2004). Structural plasticity in the bilingual brain. Nature, 431, 757.

Miyake, A., & Friedman, D. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency:

Working memory as language aptitude. In A. F. Healy & L. E. Bourne (Eds.), Foreign

language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention (pp. 339–364).

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Mougeon, R., Rehner, K., & Nadasdi, T. (2004). The learning of spoken French variation by

immersion students from Toronto Canada. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 8, 408–432.

Munoz, C. (Ed.). (2006). Age and the rate of foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual

Matters.

Nadasdi, T., Mougeon, R., & Rehner, K. (2003). Emploi du futur dans le franc-ais parle des

eleves d’immersion franc-aise. Journal of French Language Studies, 13, 195–219.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., Stern, H. H., & Todesco, A. (1978). The good language learner.

Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

Noels, K. A. (2003). Learning Spanish as a second language: Learners’ orientations and

perceptions of their teachers’ communication style. In Z. Dornyei (Ed.), Attitudes,

orientations, and motivations in language learning (pp. 97–136). Oxford: Blackwell.

Norton, B. (2001). Non-participation, imagined communities and the language classroom. In

M. P. Breen (Ed.), Learner contributions to language learning: New directions in research

(pp. 159–171). Harlow: Longman.

Ocean Personality Assessment at www.testsonthenet.com/atctests/Ocean-Personality-Assessment-

Specimen1.htm, accessed on 09/15/2008.

Oya, T., Manalo, E., & Greenwood, J. (2004). The influence of personality and anxiety on the

oral performance of Japanese speakers of English. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18,

841–855.

Paradis, M. (2004). A neurolinguistic theory of Bilingualism. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Pavlenko, A. (2002). Poststructuralist approaches to the study of social factors in L2. In V. Cook

(Ed.), Portraits of the L2 user (pp. 277–302). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Pavlenko, A. (2003). ‘Language of the enemy’: Foreign language education and national

identity. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 6, 313–331.

Pavlenko, A. (2005). Emotions and multilingualism. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2003). Trait emotional intelligence: Behavioural validation in

two studies of emotion recognition and reactivity to mood induction. European Journal of

Personality, 17, 39–57.

Piller, I. (2002). Bilingual couples talk: The discursive construction of hybridity. Amsterdam:

Benjamins.

Regan, V. (2005). From speech community back to classroom: What variation analysis

can tell us about the role of context in the acquisition of French as a foreign language.

In J.-M. Dewaele (Ed.), Focus on French as a foreign language: Multidisciplinary

approaches (pp. 191–209). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Robinson, P. (2003). Attention and memory during SLA. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long

(Eds.), The handbook of second Language acquisition (pp. 631–678). Oxford: Blackwell.

Rodriguez, M., & Abreu, O. (2003). The stability of general foreign language classroom anxiety

across English and French. Modern Language Journal, 87, 365–374.

Schumann, J. (2004). The neurobiology of aptitude. In J. Schumann, S. E. Crowell, N. E. Jones,

N. Lee, S. A. Schuchert, & L. A. Wood (Eds.), The neurobiology of learning. perspectives

from second language acquisition (pp. 7–21). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Schumann, J., & Wood, L. A. (2004). The neurobiology of motivation. In J. Schumann, S. E.

Crowell, N. E. Jones, N. Lee, S. A. Schuchert, & L. A. Wood (Eds.), The neurobiology

of learning. Perspectives from second language acquisition (pp. 23–42). Mahwah, NJ:

Erlbaum.

Shoaib, A., & Dornyei, Z. (2005). Affect in life-long learning: Exploring L2 motivation as a

dynamic process. In P. Benson & D. Nunan (Eds.), Learners’ stories: Difference and

diversity in language learning (pp. 22–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Singleton, D., & Ryan, L. (2004). Language acquisition: The age factor. Clevedon: Multilingual

Matters.

Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second language learning. London: Arnold.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


Slevc, R., & Miyake, A. (2006). Individual differences in second-language proficiency. Does

musical ability matter? Psychological Science, 17, 675–681.

Sparks, R. L., & Ganschow, L. (1991). Foreign language learning differences: Affective or native

language aptitude differences? Modern Language Journal, 75, 3–16.

Sparks, R. L., & Ganschow, L. (2001). Aptitude for learning a foreign language. Annual Review

of Applied Linguistics, 21, 90–111.

Sparks, R. L., Javorsky, J., Patton, J., & Ganschow, L. (1998). Factors in the prediction

of achievement and proficiency in a foreign language. Applied Language Learning, 9,

71–105.

Sternberg, R. J. (2002). The theory of successful intelligence and its implications for language

aptitude testing. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language

learning (pp. 13–43). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Trofimowich, P., & Baker, W. (2006). Learning second language suprasegmentals: Effect of L2

experience on prosody and fluency characteristics of L2 speech. Studies in Second

Language Acquisition, 28, 1–30.

Ushioda, E. (2001). Language learning at university: Exploring the role of motivational

thinking. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition

(pp. 91–124). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

Ushioda, E. (2008). Motivation and good language learners. In C. Griffiths (Ed.), Lessons from

good language learners (pp. 19–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ushioda, E. (2009). A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and

identity. In Z. Dornyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self.

Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

van Daele, S. (2007). Linguıstische vlotheid, accuraatheid en complexiteit in de verwerving en de

verwerking van een tweede taal [Linguistic fluency, accuracy and complexity in the

acquisition and processing of a second language]. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Free

University of Brussels.

van Daele, S., Housen, A., Pierrard, M., & Debruyn, L. (2006). The effect of extraversion on

oral L2 proficiency. Eurosla Yearbook, 6, 213–236.

van der Zee, K. I., & van Oudenhoven, J. P. (2000). The multicultural personality questionnaire:

A multidimensional instrument of multicultural effectiveness. European Journal of

Personality, 14, 291–309.

van der Zee, K. I., & van Oudenhoven, J. P. (2001). the multicultural personality questionnaire:

Reliability and validity of self- and other ratings of multicultural effectiveness. Journal of

Research in Personality, 35, 278–288.

Walls, R. T., Nardi, A. H., von Minden, A. M., & Hoffman, N. (2002). The characteristics of

effective and ineffective teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29, 37–48.

Williams, R. L. (1971). Relationship of class participation to personality, ability, and

achievement variables. Journal of Social Psychology, 83, 193–198.

Wilson, G. (1977). Introversion/extraversion. In T. Blass (Ed.), Personality variables in social

behavior (pp. 179–218). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Wilson, R. (2008). ‘‘Another language is another soul’’: Individual differences in the presentation

of self in a foreign language. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of London,

Birkbeck.

Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL

context. Modern Language Journal, 86, 55–66.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


jean-marcdewaele

Cross-Out

jean-marcdewaele

Replacement Text

v

jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

(pp. 215-228)

jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

Van Oudenhoven, J. P., & Van der Zee, K. I. (2002). Predicting multicultural effectiveness of international students: the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26, 679-694.

jean-marcdewaele

Inserted Text

Yashima, T. (2009) International Posture and the L2 Ideal Self in the Japanese EFL context. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. (pp. 144-163). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Yashima, T., & Zenuk-Nishide, L. (2008). The impact of learning contexts on proficiency,

attitudes, and L2 communication: Creating an imagined international community. System,

36(4).

Yashima, T., Zenuk-Nishide, L., & Shimuzu, K. (2004). The influence of attitudes and affect on

willingness to communicate and second language communication. Language Learning, 54,

119–152.

Young, T. J. (2007). Intercultural communicative competence and the teaching and learning of

English as a foreign language. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of London,

Birkbeck.

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45


1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45

AUTHOR QUERY FORM

Book: NHS-V008

Chapter: 26

Please e-mail or fax your responses

and any corrections to:

E-mail:

Fax:

Dear Author,

During the preparation of your manuscript for typesetting, some questions may have arisen. These are listed

below. Please check your typeset proof carefully and mark any corrections in the margin of the proof or

compile them as a separate list.

Disk use

Sometimes we are unable to process the electronic file of your article and/or artwork. If this is the case, we

have proceeded by:

& Scanning (parts of) your article & Rekeying (parts of) your article

& Scanning the artwork

Bibliography

If discrepancies were noted between the literature list and the text references, the following may apply:

& The references listed below were noted in the text but appear to be missing from your literature

list. Please complete the list or remove the references from the text.

& UNCITED REFERENCES: This section comprises references that occur in the reference list

but not in the body of the text. Please position each reference in the text or delete it. Any reference

not dealt with will be retained in this section.

Queries and/or remarks

Location in

Article

Query / remark Response

AU:1 Please check whether the

sentence ’Researchers, like

Arthur’s knights, . . . ’ requires

rephrasing.

AU:2 The significance of using ’N’ for

neuroticism is not clear, as ’N’

cannot be the abbreviation that

can replace neuroticism. Can ‘N’

be deleted?

AU:3 Should P (for psychotism) also

be deleted for the same reason as

N (for neuroticism)?

AU:4 Please check whether ’P’ could

be replaced by ’psychoticism’ in

the sentence ’Dewaele (2002a)

also found that high-P Flemish

learners . . . .’

jean-marcdewaele

Text Box

no

jean-marcdewaele

Text Box

yes it can be deleted

jean-marcdewaele

Text Box

yes it can be deleted

jean-marcdewaele

Text Box

yes it can be replaced

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

41

43

45

AU:5 Please review the edits in the

sentence ’Conscientiousness is

associated with . . . ’ for intended

meaning.

AU:6 van der Zee and van

Oudenhoven (2002) has not been

included in the reference list.

Please check.

AU:7 The use of vocabulary such as

’sex appeal’, ’sexy’ etc. is not

usually used in literary text and

should be best avoided. Please

provide suitable alternatives to

replace them.

AU:8 Please update the bibliographic

details in Dewaele, J.-M. and

Thirtle (to appear).

jean-marcdewaele

Text Box

replace "all off" line 28 by "characteristics"

jean-marcdewaele

Text Box

should be included

jean-marcdewaele

Text Box

it is perfectly appropriate here, there are no alternatives

jean-marcdewaele

Text Box

done!

individual differences in second language acquisition

Documents