Psychological models of second language (L2) communication have focused on cognitive, affective, and motivational precursors to L2 communication, while largely neglecting sociostructural factors. One way to conceptualize structural variables is in terms of social network reciprocity (mutually acknowledged network ties) and brokerage (social intermediaries). To investigate whether network positions predict willingness to communicate in the second language (L2 WTC), a cohort of English-for-Academic-Purposes students (N = 67) was surveyed about discussion partners within the group. An autologistic actor attribute model was used to examine social network patterns of L2 WTC. As hypothesized, students involved in reciprocal structures reported stronger L2 WTC, as well as those in brokerage positions between larger social clusters. Contrary to initial hypotheses, local forms of brokerage held a negative association with WTC, suggesting the possible role of network closure. Results indicate that communicativeness is supported by tight-knit predictable exchanges, and by being in a position to influence the social diffusion of information.
AllardR.LandryR. (1992). Ethnolinguistic vitality beliefs and language maintenance and loss. In FaseW.JaspaertK.KroonS. (Eds.), Maintenance and loss of minority languages (pp. 171-195). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
2.
BearmanP. (1997). Generalized exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 102, 1383-1415.
3.
BecknerC.BlytheR.BybeeJ.ChristiansenM. H.CroftW.EllisN. C.. . . SchoenemannT. (2009). Language is a complex dynamic system: Position paper. Language Learning, 59, 1-26.
4.
BorgattiS. P.EverettM. G.FreemanL. C. (2002). Ucinet 6 for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
5.
BurtR. S. (1984). Network items and the General Social Survey. Social Networks, 6, 293-339.
6.
BurtR. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
BurtR. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110, 349-399.
8.
ButtsC. T. (2008). A relational event framework for social action. Sociological Methodology, 38, 155-200.
9.
CaoY. (2011). Investigating situational willingness to communicate within second language classrooms from an ecological perspective. System, 39, 468-479.
10.
CaoY.PhilpJ. (2006). Interactional context and willingness to communicate: A comparison of behavior in whole class, group and dyadic interaction. System, 34, 480-493.
11.
ClémentR.BakerS. B.MacIntyreP. D. (2003). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The effects of context, norms, and vitality. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 22, 190-209.
12.
ClémentR.DörnyeiZ.NoelsK. A. (1994). Motivation, self-confidence, and group cohesion in the foreign language classroom. Language Learning, 44, 417-448.
13.
ClémentR.KruidenierB. G. (1985). Aptitude, attitude, and motivation in second language proficiency: A test of Clément’s model. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 4, 21-37.
14.
DaraganovaG.RobinsG. (2013). Autologistic actor attribute models. In LusherD.KoskinenJ.RobinsG. (Eds.), Exponential random graph models for social networks: Theory, methods and applications (pp. 102-114). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
15.
DörnyeiZ.KormosJ. (2000). The role of individual and social variables in oral task performance. Language Teaching Research, 4, 275-300.
16.
FreemanL. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1, 215-239.
17.
FreemanL. C.BorgattiS. P.WhiteD. R. (1991). Centrality in valued graphs: A measure of betweenness based on network flow. Social Networks, 13, 141-154.
18.
GallagherH. C.RobinsG. (2015). Network statistical models for language learning contexts: Exponential random graph models and willingness to communicate. Language Learning, 65, 929-962.
19.
GardnerR. C. (2010). Motivation and second language acquisition: The socio-educational model. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
20.
GilesH.BourhisR. Y.TaylorD. M. (1977). Towards a theory of language in ethnic group relations. In GilesH. (Ed.). Language, ethnicity and intergroup relations (pp. 307-348). London, England: Academic Press.
21.
GudykunstW. B.NishidaT. (2001). Anxiety, uncertainty, and perceived effectiveness of communication across relationships and cultures. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 25, 55-71.
22.
HiverP.Al-HoorieA. H. (2016). A dynamic ensemble for second language research: Putting complexity theory into practice. Modern Language Journal, 100, 741-756.
23.
HsiehF. Y.BlochD. A.LarsenM. D. (1998). A simple method of sample size calculation for linear and logistic regression. Statistics in Medicine, 17, 1623-1634.
24.
KalishY. (2008). Bridging in social networks: Who are the people in structural holes and why are they there?Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 11, 53-66.
25.
KangS.-J. (2005). Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language. System, 33, 277-292.
26.
KrackhardtD. (1999). The ties that torture: Simmelian tie analysis in organizations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 16, 183-210.
27.
Larsen-FreemanD. (2016). Classroom-oriented research from a complex systems perspective. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6, 377-393.
28.
LewinK. (1948). Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics. New York, NY: Harper & Bros.
29.
LongM. H. (1981). Questions in foreigner talk discourse. Language Learning, 31, 135-157.
30.
MacIntyreP. D.BakerS. C.ClémentR.ConrodS. (2001). Willingness to communicate, social support, and language-learning orientations of immersion students. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 369-388.
31.
MacIntyreP. D.CharosC. (1996). Personality, attitude, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 3-18.
32.
MacIntyreP. D.DörnyeiZ.ClémentR.NoelsK. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern Language Journal, 82, 545-562.
33.
MacIntyreP. D.LegattoJ. J. (2011). A dynamic system approach to willingness to communicate: Developing an idiodynamic method to capture rapidly changing affect. Applied Linguistics, 32, 1-24.
34.
McCroskeyJ. C. (1992). Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale. Communication Quarterly, 40, 16-25.
35.
McCroskeyJ. C.RichmondV. P. (1987). Willingness to communicate. In McCroskeyJ. C.DalyJ. A. (Eds.), Personality and interpersonal communication (pp. 129-156). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
36.
MercerS. (2014). Social network analysis and complex dynamic systems. In DörnyeiZ.MacIntyreP. D.HenryA. (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (Vol. 81, pp. 73-82). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
37.
MilroyJ.MilroyL. (1985). Linguistic change, social network and speaker innovation. Journal of Linguistics, 21, 339-384.
38.
MolmL. D.CollettJ. L.SchaeferD. R. (2007). Building solidarity through generalized exchange: A theory of reciprocity. American Journal of Sociology, 113, 205-242.
39.
MolmL. D.SchaeferD. R.CollettJ. L. (2007). The value of reciprocity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 70, 199-217.
40.
MongeP. R.ContractorN. S. (2003). Theories of communication networks. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
41.
ObstfeldD. (2005). Social networks, the tertius iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 100-130.
42.
RobinsG. (2015). Doing social network research: Network-based research design for social scientists. London, England: Sage.
43.
RobinsG.KashimaY. (2008). Social psychology and social networks: Individuals and social systems. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 11, 1-12.
44.
RobinsG.PattisonP.KalishY.LusherD. (2007). An introduction to exponential random graph (p*) models for social networks. Social Networks, 29, 173-191.
45.
SchecterA.PilnyA.LeungA.PooleM. S.ContractorN. (2018). Step by step: Capturing the dynamics of work team process through relational event sequences. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39, 1163-1181.
46.
SchumannJ. H. (1986). Research on the acculturation model for second language acquisition. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 7, 379-392.
47.
SnijdersT. A. B.van de BuntG. G.SteglichC. E. G. (2010). Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks, 32, 44-60.
48.
StohlC.GilesH.MaassA. (2016). Social networks and intergroup communication. In GilesH.MaassA. (Eds.). Advances in intergroup communication (pp. 317-340). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
49.
UshiodaE. (2015). Context and complex dynamic systems theory. In DörnyeiZ.MacIntyreP. D.HenryA. (Eds.). Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 47-54). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
50.
WangP.RobinsG.PattisonP. (2009). PNet: Program for the simulation and estimation of p* exponential random graph models. Retrieved from http://www.melnet.org.au/pnet/
51.
YashimaT.Zenuk-NishideL. (2008). The impact of learning contexts on proficiency, attitudes, and L2 communication: Creating an imagined international community. System, 36, 566-585.
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.
