Predictors of Foreign-Language Anxiety: Examining the ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

large effect size. The estimated coefficient for the population (adjusted R 2 ) was61.7%.As evidenced by Table 2, however, of the six learner characteristics only twocontributed significantly (p < .0005) to the prediction of FLA: L2-self-concept andcompetitiveness. More importantly, it was the same two variables whose t valuessatisfied the rough absolute value-of-2-rule, according to which, useful predictorshave t values well below –2 or above +2 (SPSS Base 10.0 Applications Guide,1999). With t values of –8.179 and 4.220, both L2-self-concept and competitivenessqualify as important predictors of FLA, with the former being the stronger one.As for the other learner characteristics, they are shown by the model as lessuseful predictors of anxiety level, which is indicated not only by their small t-, buttheir substantially lower ‘Beta’ values as well. Based on these two statistics, proficiencylevel appears as the third best predictor, followed by FL aptitude, strengthof motivation, and, finally, perfectionism. The squared partial correlation values,recommended by Cohen (1988) as useful measures of effect sizes, also confirm thatthese learner characteristics had incomparably less relative influence on participants’FLA than L2-self-concept and competitiveness. As shown in Table 2, thesquared partial correlation values for proficiency, FL aptitude, strength of motivation,and perfectionism are all below 2%, indicative of very small, almost negligibleeffect sizes according to Cohen’s (1988) criteria, whereas the high valuespertaining to L2-self-concept (42.12%) and competitiveness (16.24%) are suggestiveof large, and medium size effects, respectively.According to the results of the backward selection method, the unique contributionof these four variables to the overall prediction of FLA was so little that amodel with L2-self-concept and competitiveness as predictor variables may actuallyproduce a more parsimonious explanation of the differences in participants’anxiety level.Table 3: Final multiple regression model for predicting FLAVariableStandardized regressioncoefficient (β)t valueSquared partial correlationcoefficients(%)L2-self-concept -.717 -11.477** 57.91Competitiveness .264 4.229** 15.68Note. Model R = .795; R 2 = .632; Adjusted R 2 = .624; Std. Error = 12.40; F = 82.477, p= < .0005** p < .0005As shown in Table 3, there was only a slight reduction (0.795 vs. 0.800) in the valueof R after the removal of proficiency, FL aptitude, strength of motivation, and perfectionism.R 2 was 0.632 for the model with two variables, a negligible drop from0.640 for the full model. This means that 63.2 % of the variance in first year Englishmajors’ FLA was associated with differences in L2-self-concept and competitiveness.Adjusted R 2 for this smaller model was actually larger than for the one withall six independent variables (62.4% vs. 61.7%), and the standard error decreased(12.52 vs. 12.4), which indicates a relatively better match between the predicted136 UPRT 2007: Empirical studies in English applied linguistics
and observed values of participants’ anxiety scores. The squared partial correlationvalues are suggestive of a large effect size (i.e. > 26) for L2-self-concept, and amedium one (i.e. >13 but < 26) for competitiveness, as in the full model.This finding, with the signs of the regression coefficients also taken into account,suggests that high levels of FLA were associated with a combination ofcompetitiveness and negative L2-related self-perceptions. In other words, anxiousstudents in the sample tended to express a strong desire to compete with theirpeers in their English classes, nurturing, at the same time, a rather negative L2-self-image, manifested in low-rated TL skills, dissatisfaction with current level ofproficiency, unfavourable evaluations of FL competence and aptitude relative topeers, lack of TL self-confidence, as well as finding the learning task difficult, andfeeling little control over its outcome.DiscussionThe purpose of this study was to explore the contributions of cognitive, affective,and personality variables with respect to the prediction of first year English majorparticipants’ FLA. The correlational analyses revealed (1) a very strong link betweenanxiety and L2-self-concept, (2) a strong relationship with proficiency level,(3) weaker but significant associations with the two personality characteristics:moderate with competitiveness, and low with perfectionism, and (4) no significantrelation to FL aptitude and strength of motivation. When the effect of all sixlearner characteristics was examined concurrently, as has been shown, only two ofthem, L2-self-concept and competitiveness, were found to be significant predictorsof FLA in this sample of first year English majors.The fact that it was L2-self-concept, a composite of L2-related self-perceptionswhich explained the greatest proportion of the variance in FLA, both in isolationand in the presence of other learner variables, underscores the importance oflearners’ beliefs/ subjective feelings about themselves as language learners as akey factor in how much anxiety they experience, supporting some earlier suggestionsin the literature (Bailey et al., 1999; Foss & Reitzel, 1991; Horwitz, 1990). Thestrong relationship this investigation revealed between negative L2-related selfperceptionsand high feelings of FLA lends empirical support to the view in thepsychological literature that “anxiety arises from a self-assessment of personaldeficit in meeting situational demands” (Sarason, 1984, p. 937), in this case, thelinguistic demands and performance standards of university English classes andthose of smooth interaction in the TL in general. The results corroborate earlierstudies of language learning anxiety, quantitative and qualitative ones, indicatingan inverse relationship between anxiety level and self-perceived competence (Bailey,1983; Cheng, 2002; Clément et al., 1980, 1994; Kitano, 2001; MacIntyre et al.,1997; Price, 1991) and self-perceived ability for learning and achieving completemastery of a FL (Horwitz & Sadow in preparation referred to in Horwitz, 1990;Horwitz, 1995), and a positive relationship with appraisal of difficulty with L2learning (Cheng, 2002; Ganschow et al., 1994).Tóth, Zs. Predictors of foreign-language anxiety 137
Page 2 and 3: have been investigated, no previous
Page 4 and 5: Pohlman, & Bishop-Marbury, 1991; Ga
Page 6 and 7: Besides self-perceptions of TL comp
Page 8 and 9: InstrumentsSelf-report instruments
Page 10 and 11: CompetitivenessTo assess how compet
Page 12 and 13: Table 1: Correlations between cogni
Page 16 and 17: As for the other significant predic
Page 18 and 19: English majors’ self-appraisal of
Page 20 and 21: The findings concerning the non-sig
Page 22 and 23: ReferencesAida, Y. (1994). Examinat
Page 24 and 25: Horwitz, E. K. (1996). Even teacher
Page 26: Wine, J. D. (1982). Evaluation anxi

Predictors of Foreign-Language Anxiety: Examining the ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?