Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMystkowska-Wiertelak, Annaen
dc.contributor.authorPawlak, Mirosławen
dc.date.accessioned2015-06-12T12:38:22Z
dc.date.available2015-06-12T12:38:22Z
dc.date.issued2014-10-15en
dc.identifier.issn1731-7533en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/9706
dc.description.abstractA person’s willingness to communicate (WTC), believed to stem from a combination of proximal and distal variables comprising psychological, linguistic, educational and communicative dimensions of language, appears to be a significant predictor of success in language learning. The ability to communicate is both a means and end of language education, since, on the one hand, being able to express the intended meanings in the target language is generally perceived as the main purpose of any language course and, on the other, linguistic development proceeds in the course of language use. However, MacIntyre (2007, p. 564) observes that some learners, despite extensive study, may never become successful L2 speakers. The inability or unwillingness to sustain contacts with more competent language users may influence the way learners are evaluated in various social contexts. Establishing social networks as a result of frequent communication with target language users is believed to foster linguistic development. WTC, initially considered a stable personality trait and then a result of context-dependent influences, has recently been viewed as a dynamic phenomenon changing its intensity within one communicative event (MacIntyre and Legatto, 2011; MacIntyre et al., 2011). The study whose results are reported here attempts to tap into factors that shape one’s willingness to speak during a communicative task. The measures employed to collect the data - selfratings and surveys - allow looking at the issue from a number of perspectives.en
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegoen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesResearch in Language;12en
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.en
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/en
dc.subjectL2 willingness to communicateen
dc.subjectclassroom interactionen
dc.subjectcommunicative tasksen
dc.titleFluctuations in Learners’ Willingness to Communicate During Communicative Task Performance: Conditions and Tendenciesen
dc.page.number245-260en
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationMystkowska-Wiertelak Anna - Adam Mickiewicz University, Kaliszen
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationPawlak Mirosław - Adam Mickiewicz University, Kaliszen
dc.identifier.eissn2083-4616
dc.referencesAsker, B. 1998. Student reticence and oral testing: A Hong Kong study of willingness to communicate. Communication Research Reports 15(2): 162-169. DOI: doi: 10.1080/08824099809362110en
dc.referencesBaker, S. C. and MacIntyre, P. D. 2000. The role of gender and immersion in communication and second language orientations. Language Learning, 50(2): 311-341. DOI: doi: 10.1111/0023-8333.00119en
dc.referencesBurgoon, J. K. 1976. The unwillingness-to-communicate: Development and validation. Communication Monographs 43, 60-69. DOI: doi: 10.1080/03637757609375916en
dc.referencesCao, Y. and Philp, J. 2006. Interactional context and willingness to communicate: A comparison of behavior in whole class, group and dyadic interaction. System, 34(4): 480-493. DOI: doi: 10.1016/j.system.2006.05.002en
dc.referencesChan, B. M. and McCroskey, J. C. 1987. The WTC scale as a predictor of classroom participation. Communication Research Reports 4: 47-50.en
dc.referencesClément, R. and Gardner, R. C. 2001. Second language mastery. In H. Giles and W. P. Robinson (eds) Handbook of language and social psychology. London, UK: Wiley: 489-504.en
dc.referencesClément, R., Baker, S. C., and MacIntyre, P. D. 2003. Willingness to communicate in a second language: The effects of context, norms, and vitality. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 22(2): 190-209. DOI: doi: 10.1177/0261927X03022002003en
dc.referencesClément, R. and Kruidenier, B. G. 1985. Aptitude, attitude and motivation in second language proficiency: A test of Clément's model. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 4(1): 21-37. DOI: doi: 10.1177/0261927X8500400102en
dc.referencesDörnyei, Z. 2005. The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.en
dc.referencesDörnyei, Z. 2009. The L2 Motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (eds) Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol: Multilingual Matters: 9-42.en
dc.referencesGardner, R. C. 1985. Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitude and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.en
dc.referencesGregersen, T. and P.D. MacIntyre 2013. Capitalizing on language learners’ individuality. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.en
dc.referencesHashimoto, Y. 2002. Motivation and willingness to communicate as predictors of reported L2 use. Second Language Studies 20(2): 29-70.en
dc.referencesHorwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., and Cope, J. 1986. Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2): 125-132. DOI: doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1986.tb05256.xen
dc.referencesKang, S. 2005. Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language, System 33: 277-292. DOI: doi: 10.1016/j.system.2004.10.004en
dc.referencesKuhl, J. 1994a. A theory of action and state orientations. In J. Kuhl and J. Beckmann (eds),Volition and personality. Gottingen: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers: 9-46en
dc.referencesKuhl, J. 1994b. Action vs. state orientation: Psychometric properties of the Action Control Scale (ACS-90). In J. Kuhl and J. Beckmann (eds),Volition and personality.en
dc.referencesGottingen: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers: 47-59en
dc.referencesLantolf, J. P. 2006. Sociocultural Theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28: 67-109. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/ doi: 10.1017/S0272263106060037en
dc.referencesLong, M. H. 1985c. Input and second language acquisition theory. In S.M. Gass and C.G. Madden (eds). Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House: 377-393.en
dc.referencesLong. M. H. 1996. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie and T. K. Bhatia (eds). Handbook of research on second language acquisition. New York: Academic Press: 413-468.en
dc.referencesMacIntyre, P. D. 1994. Variables underlying willingness to communicate: A causal analysis. Communication Research Reports 11: 135-142. DOI: doi: 10.1080/08824099409359951en
dc.referencesMacIntyre, P. D. 2007. Willingness to communicate in the second language: Understanding the decision to speak as a volitional process. The Modern Language Journal 91(4): 564-576. DOI: doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00623.xen
dc.referencesMacIntyre, P. D., Burns, C., and Jessome, A. 2011. Ambivalence about communicating in a second language: A qualitative study of French immersion students' willingness to communicate. The Modern Language Journal 95(1): 81-96. DOI: doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01141.xen
dc.referencesMacIntyre, P. D. and Charos, C. 1996. Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 15(1): 3-26. DOI: doi: 10.1177/0261927X960151001en
dc.referencesMacIntyre, P. D. and Clement, R. 1996. A model of willingness to communicate in a second language: The concept, its antecedents and implications. Paper presented at the 11th World Congress of Applied Linguistics, Jyväskylä, Finland.en
dc.referencesMacIntyre, P. and Doucette, J. 2010. Willingness to communicate and action control. System 38: 161-171. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/ doi: 10.1016/j.system.2009.12.013en
dc.referencesMacIntyre, P. D. and Legatto, J. J. 2011. A dynamic system approach to willingness to communicate: Developing an idiodynamic method to capture rapidly changing affect. Applied Linguistics 32(2): 149-171. DOI: doi: 10.1093/applin/amq037en
dc.referencesMacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., and Conrod, S. 2001. Willingness to communicate, social support, and language-learning orientations of immersion students. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 23(3): 369-388. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/ doi: 10.1017/S0272263101003035en
dc.referencesMacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., and Donovan, L. A. 2002. Sex and age effects on willingness to communicate, anxiety, perceived competence, and L2 motivation among junior high school French immersion students. Language Learning 52(3): 537-564. DOI: doi: 10.1111/1467-9922.00194en
dc.referencesMacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., and 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. DOI: doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb05543.xen
dc.referencesMcCroskey, J. C. 1992. Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale. Communication Quarterly 40(1): 16-25. DOI: doi: 10.1080/01463379209369817en
dc.referencesMcCroskey, J. C. and Richmond, V. P. 1982. Communication apprehension and shyness: Conceptual and operational distinctions. Central States Speech Journal 33: 458-468. DOI: doi: 10.1080/10510978209388452en
dc.referencesMcCroskey, J. C. and Richmond, V. P. 1991. Willingness to communicate: A cognitive view. In M. Booth-Butterfield (ed), Communication, cognition, and anxiety.en
dc.referencesNewbury Park, CA: Sage: 19-37.en
dc.referencesMunezane, Y. 2013. Attitudes, affect and ideal L2 self as predictors of willingness to communicate. In R. Leah, A. Ewert, M. Pawlak, and M. Wrembel (eds), EUROSLA Yearbook: Volume 13: 176-198. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/ doi: 10.1075/eurosla.13.09munen
dc.referencesPawlak, M. and Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A. (in press). Investigating the dynamic nature of L2 willingness to communicate.en
dc.referencesNoels, K. A. 2001. New orientations in language learning motivation: Toward a contextual model of intrinsic, extrinsic, and integrative orientations and motivation.In Z. Dörnyei and R. Schmidt (eds), Motivation and second language acquisition. Honolulu, HI: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa: 43-68.en
dc.referencesNoels, K.A., Pelltier, L.G., Clément, R. and Vallerand, R.J. 2000. Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory.Language Learning 50: 57-85. DOI: doi: 10.1111/0023-8333.00111en
dc.referencesPeng, J. 2007. Willingness to communicate in the Chinese EFL classroom: A cultural perspective. In J. Liu (ed), English language teaching in China: New approaches, perspectives, and standards. London: Continuum: 250-269.en
dc.referencesPeng, J. E. 2012. Towards an ecological understanding of willingness to communicate in EFL classrooms in China. System 40(2): 203-213. DOI: doi: 10.1016/j.system.2012.02.002en
dc.referencesPeng, J. E. 2014. Willingness to communicate inside the EFL classroom: An ecological perspective. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.en
dc.referencesPeng, J. E. and Woodrow, L. J. 2010 Willingness to communicate in English: A model in the Chinese EFL classroom context. Language Learning 60: 834-876. DOI: doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00576.xen
dc.referencesRyan, S. 2009. Self and identity in L2 motivation in Japan: The ideal L2 self and Japanese learners of English. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (eds), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol: Multilingual Matters: 120-143.en
dc.referencesSwain, M. 1985. Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass, and C. Madden (eds) Input in second language acquisition. New York: Newbury House: 235-256.en
dc.referencesSwain, M. 1998. Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty and J.en
dc.referencesWilliams (eds), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 64-81.en
dc.referencesUshioda, E. 2009. A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (eds), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol: Multilingual Matters: 215-228).en
dc.referencesVygotsky, L.S. 1978. Mind in Society Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Yashima, T. 2002. Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal 86(1): 54-66. DOI: doi: 10.1111/1540-4781.00136en
dc.referencesYashima, T. 2009. International posture and the ideal L2 self in the Japanese EFL context. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (eds), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol: Multilingual Matters: 144-192.en
dc.referencesYashima, T. 2012. Willingness to communicate: Momentary volition that results in L2 behaviour. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan and M. Williams (eds), Psychology for language learning: Insights from research, theory and practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan: 119-135.en
dc.referencesYashima, T., Zenuk-Nishide, L., and Shimizu, K. 2004. The influence of attitudes and affect on willingness to communicate and second language communication.Language Learning 54(1): 119-152. DOI: doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00250.xen
dc.contributor.authorEmailMystkowska-Wiertelak Anna - mystkows@amu.edu.plen
dc.contributor.authorEmailPawlak Mirosław - pawlakmi@amu.edu.plen
dc.identifier.doi10.2478/rela-2014-0019en


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.