The study explored the relationship between L2 utterance fluency and perceived fluency in monologic and dialogic speaking. A total of 136 Chinese university English learners with diverse L2 proficiency levels and three experienced raters participated in the study. The study employed a mixed-methods approach integrating quantitative (regression analysis) and qualitative (stimulated recalls) analyses. In the monologic task, all utterance fluency dimensions (speed, breakdown, and repair fluency measures) significantly predicted perceived fluency ratings, except for filled pause rate and false start rate. Breakdown fluency measures, particularly silent pause measures, had the most substantial impact on perceived fluency ratings. In the dialogic task, breakdown fluency emerged as the sole significant predictor for perceived fluency scores, overshadowing the predictive impact of speed and repair fluency measures. The temporal measure of turn-taking did not significantly affect perceived fluency scores. Stimulated recalls were generally consistent with the quantitative results and revealed additional factors—content quality, pronunciation, and comprehensibility—that influenced fluency perceptions. The study highlighted the contextual effect on the relationship between utterance fluency and perceived fluency, suggesting that L2 speaking proficiency rating rubrics should be adjusted to account for differences between monologic and dialogic speaking.
BoskerH. R.PingetA. F.QuenéH.SandersT.De JongN. H. (2013). What makes speech sound fluent? The contributions of pauses, speed and repairs. Language Testing, 30(2), 159–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532212455394
3.
BrodM.TeslerL. E.ChristensenT. L. (2009). Qualitative research and content validity: Developing best practices based on science and experience. Quality of Life Research, 18, 1263–1278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9540-9
CameronD. (2001). Working with spoken discourse. Sage.
6.
ClarkH. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge University Press.
7.
Council of Europe. (2020). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment–companion volume. https://www.coe.int/lang-cefr
De JongN. H.WempeT. (2009). Praat script to detect syllable nuclei and measure speech rate automatically. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 385–390. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.2.385
10.
DerwingT. M.RossiterM. J.MunroM. J.ThomsonR. I. (2004). Second language fluency: Judgments on different tasks. Language Learning, 54(4), 655–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00282.x
11.
DörnyeiZ.KormosJ. (1998). Problem-solving mechanisms in L2 communication: A psycholinguistic perspective. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(3), 349–385. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263198003039
12.
FengR. (2022). Cognitive factors influencing utterance fluency in L2 dialogues: Monadic and non-monadic perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 926367. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.926367
13.
FosterP.TonkynA.WigglesworthG. (2000). Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21, 354–375. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.3.354
14.
GagnéN.FrenchL. M.HummelK. M. (2025). Investigating the contribution of L1 fluency, L2 initial fluency, working memory and phonological memory to L2 fluency development. Language Teaching Research, 29(2), 633–656. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221076418
15.
GaoJ.SunP. P. (2023). To correct or not: The role of L1 fluency in understanding and measuring L2 fluency. TESOL Quarterly, 57(2), 643–655. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3198
16.
GaoJ.SunP. P. (2024). How does learners’ L2 utterance fluency relate to their L1? A meta-analysis. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 34(1), 276–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12493
17.
GaoJ.SunP. P.LiC. (2025). Exploring the optimal thresholds of silent pauses for measuring second language utterance fluency in monologic and dialogic speaking. Language Testing, 42(3), 283–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322251315792
18.
GilabertR.BarónJ.LevkinaM. (2011). Manipulating task complexity across task types and modes. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 105–138). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2.10ch5
19.
GintherA.DimovaS.YangR. (2010). Conceptual and empirical relationships between temporal measures of fluency and oral English proficiency with implications for automated scoring. Language Testing, 27(3), 379–399. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532210364407
20.
HousenA.KuikenF.VedderI. (2012). Complexity, accuracy and fluency: Definitions, measurement and research. In HousenA.KuikenF.VedderI. (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency (pp. 1–20). John Benjamins.
21.
HuenschA.Tracy-VenturaN. (2017). Understanding second language fluency behavior: The effects of individual differences in first language fluency, cross-linguistic differences, and proficiency over time. Applied Psycholinguistics, 38(4), 755–785. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716416000424
22.
JeonE. H. (2015). Multiple regression. In PlonskyL. (Ed.), Advancing quantitative methods in second language research (pp. 131–158). Routledge.
23.
KahngJ. (2014). Exploring utterance and cognitive fluency of L1 and L2 English speakers: Temporal measures and stimulated recall. Language Learning, 64(4), 809–854. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12084
KooT. K.LiM. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
26.
KormosJ. (2006). Speech production and second language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum.
27.
KormosJ.DénesM. (2004). Exploring measures and perceptions of fluency in the speech of second language learners. System, 32(2), 145–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.01.001
28.
LehtiläE.PeltonenP.LintunenP. (2024). Listener perceptions of L1 speech in L2 and L3 fluency assessment contexts: A qualitative approach. In ToivolaM.LintunenP.HeikkolaL. M. (Eds.), Puheen tutkimuksen uusia suuntia—Aineistona vapaasti tuotettupuhe [New Directions in Speech Research—Freely Produced Speech as Data] (pp. 191–215). AFinLA. https://doi.org/10.30660/afinla.136100
LintunenP.MuttaM.PeltonenP. (2020). Fluency in L2 learning and use. Multilingual Matters.
31.
MackeyA.GassS. M. (2016). Second language research: Methodology and design (2nd ed.). Routledge.
32.
MayL. (2011). Interactional competence in a paired speaking test: Features salient to raters. Language Assessment Quarterly, 8(2), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.565845
National Foreign Languages Teaching Advisory Board under the Ministry of Education the People’s Republic of China. (2020). College English teaching guidelines (2020 ed.). Higher Education Press.
35.
MichelM. (2011). Effects of task complexity and interaction in L2 performance. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 141–174). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2.12ch6
36.
OrtegaL.IwashitaN.NorrisJ. M.RabieS. (2002, October). An investigation of elicited imitation tasks in crosslinguistic SLA research. Paper presentation at the 20th Second Language Research Forum, Toronto, Canada. https://www.iris-database.org/details/HAPZ2-KRwXl
37.
PellegrinoF.CoupéC.MarsicoE. (2011). A cross-language perspective on speech information rate. Language, 87(3), 539–558. https://doi.org/10.2307/23011654
38.
PeltonenP. (2017). Temporal fluency and problem-solving in interaction: An exploratory study of fluency resources in L2 dialogue. System, 70, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.08.009
39.
PeltonenP. (2022). Connections between measured and assessed fluency in L2 peer interaction: A problem-solving perspective. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 60(4), 983–1011. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2020-0030
40.
PeltonenP.LintunenP. (2016). Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in L2 fluency analysis: A study of Finnish-speaking and Swedish-speaking learners of English at two school levels. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 209–238. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2014-0018
41.
PlonskyL.OswaldF. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079
42.
PréfontaineY.KormosJ. (2016). A qualitative analysis of perceptions of fluency in second language French. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54(2), 151–169. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-9995
43.
RossiterM. J. (2009). Perceptions of L2 fluency by native and non-native speakers of English. Canadian Modern Language Review, 65(3), 395–412. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.65.3.395
44.
SatoM. (2014). Exploring the construct of interactional oral fluency: Second language acquisition and language testing approaches. System, 45(1), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.05.004
45.
SegalowitzN. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. Routledge.
SkehanP.FosterP.ShumS. (2016). Ladders and snakes in second language fluency. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54(2), 97–111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-9992
48.
SuzukiS.KormosJ. (2020). Linguistic dimensions of comprehensibility and perceived fluency: An investigation of complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language argumentative speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(1), 143–167. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000421
49.
SuzukiS.KormosJ.UchiharaT. (2021). The relationship between utterance and perceived fluency: A meta-analysis of correlational studies. The Modern Language Journal, 105(2), 435–463. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12706
50.
TavakoliP. (2016). Fluency in monologic and dialogic task performance: Challenges in defining and measuring L2 fluency. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54(2), 133–150. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-9994
51.
TavakoliP.SkehanP. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In EllisR. (Ed.), Planning and task performance (pp. 239–273). John Benjamins.
52.
TavakoliP.WrightC. (2020). Second language speech fluency: From research to practice. Cambridge University Press.
53.
TrouvainJ.WernerR. (2022). A phonetic view on annotating speech pauses and pause-internal phonetic particles. In SchwarzeC.GrawunderS. (Eds.) Transkription und annotation gesprochener sprache und multimodaler interaktion: konzepte, probleme, lösungen [Transcription and annotation of spoken language and multimodal interaction: Concepts, problems, solutions] (pp. 55–73). Gunter Narr Verlag.
54.
Van OsM.De JongN. H.BoskerH. R. (2020). Fluency in dialogue: Turn-Taking behavior shapes perceived fluency in native and nonnative speech. Language Learning, 70(4), 1183–1217. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12416
55.
WeiJ.LlosaL. (2015). Investigating differences between American and Indian raters in assessing TOEFL iBT speaking tasks. Language Assessment Quarterly, 12(3), 283–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2015.1037446
56.
WilliamsS. A.KorkoM. (2019). Pause behavior within reformulations and the proficiency level of second language learners of English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 40(3), 723–742. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716418000802
57.
Witton-DaviesG. (2014). The study of fluency and its development in monologue and dialogue [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Lancaster. https://taiwan.academia.edu/GilesWittonDavies
58.
WrightC. (2021). Effects of task type on L2 Mandarin fluency development. Journal of Second Language Studies, 3(2), 157–179. https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.00010.wri
59.
WuS. L.TioY. P.OrtegaL. (2022). Elicited imitation as a measure of L2 proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 44(1), 271–300. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263121000103
YanX.KimH. R.KimJ. Y. (2021). Dimensionality of speech fluency: Examining the relationships among complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) features of speaking performances on the Aptis test. Language Testing, 38(4), 485–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532220951508
62.
YanX.LeiY.PanY. (2025). Diving deep into the relationship between speech fluency and second language proficiency: A meta-analysis. Language Learning. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12701
63.
YangL.WangS.ChangH.ShengJ. (2013). Qualitative research in applied linguistics. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
