The effects of reference of comparison (self-referential vs. normative) and regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention) feedback on EFL learners’ willingness to communicate
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online March, 2024
The effects of reference of comparison (self-referential vs. normative) and regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention) feedback on EFL learners’ willingness to communicate
This article reports on a mixed methods study that examined the effect of reference of comparison (self-referential vs. normative) and regulatory focus (promotion-focused vs. prevention-focused) on willingness to communicate (WTC) among learners of English as a foreign language (EFL). One hundred female English learners were randomly assigned to the self-referential, normative, prevention, promotion, and control feedback groups. They received different types of feedback for 15 sessions. The students were tested for their WTC, anxiety and communication competence before and after the intervention. The results of MANOVA and paired samples comparisons indicated that self-referential, normative, and promotion feedback positively improved WTC and communication competence and decreased anxiety. However, prevention feedback decreased WTC and communication competence and increased anxiety. Follow-up interview data indicated that feedback influenced WTC by providing learning checks or affecting learners’ self-confidence, reducing anxiety, fostering motivation, and decreasing peer pressure. Finally, it was suggested that teachers should mainly present feedback to emphasize task accomplishments and growth and to inform the students about their progress over time.
BakerS.C.MacIntyreP.D. (2003). The role of gender and immersion in communication and second language orientations. Language Learning, 53, 65–96.
2.
Bangert-DrownsR.L.KulikC.L.C.KulikJ.A.MorganM. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213–238.
3.
Baran-ŁucarzM. (2014). The link between pronunciation anxiety and willingness to communicate in the foreign-language classroom: The Polish EFL context. Canadian Modern Language Review, 70, 445–473.
4.
BlackP.WilliamD. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5, 7–75.
5.
ButlerR. (2000). Making judgments about ability: The role of implicit theories of ability in moderating inferences from temporal and social comparison information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 965–978.
6.
ButlerR. (2006). Are mastery and ability goals both adaptive? Evaluation, initial goal construction and the quality of task engagement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 595–611.
7.
CaoY. (2011). Investigating situational willingness to communicate within second language classrooms from an ecological perspective. System, 39, 468–479.
8.
CaoY. (2014). A sociocognitive perspective on second language classroom willingness to communicate. TESOL Quarterly, 48, 789–814.
9.
CaoY.PhilipJ. (2006). Interactional context and willingness to communicate: A comparison of behavior in whole class, group and dyadic interaction. System, 34, 480–493.
10.
ClémentR.BakerS.C.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.
11.
CohenJ. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.
CreswellJ.W.Plano ClarkV.L.GuttmannM.L.HansonW.E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook on mixed methods in the behavioral and social research (pp. 209–240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
CroweE.HigginsE.T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 117–132.
15.
DörnyeiZ. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16.
ElliotA.J.McGregorH.A. (2001). A 2×2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501–519.
17.
Fernández-GarcíaA.Fonseca-MoraM.C. (2019). EFL learners’ speaking proficiency and its connection to emotional understanding, willingness to communicate and musical experience. Language Teaching Research. Epub ahead of print 3 December 2019. DOI: 10.1177/1362168819891868.
18.
FörsterJ.HigginsE.T.IdsonL.C. (1998). Approach and avoidance strength during goal attainment: regulatory focus and the ‘goal looms larger’ effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1115–1131.
19.
FörsterJ.GrantH.IdsonL.C.HigginsE.T. (2001). Success/failure feedback, expectancies, and approach/avoidance motivation: How regulatory focus moderates classic relations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 253–260.
20.
FreiermuthM.R.ItoM.F. (2020). Seeking the source: The effect of personality and previous experiences on university students’ L2 willingness to communicate. Learning and Motivation, 71, 101640.
21.
GhonsoolyB.KhajavyG.H.AsadpourS.F. (2012). Willingness to communicate in English among Iranian non-English major university students. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 31, 197–211.
22.
HashimotoY. (2002). Motivation and willingness to communicate as predictors of reported L2 use: The Japanese ESL context. Second Language Studies, 20, 29–70.
23.
HattieJ.JaegerR. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning: A deductive approach. Assessment in Education, 5, 111–122.
24.
HattieJ.TimperleyH. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.
25.
HattieJ.A.BiggsJ.PurdieN. (1996). Effects of learning skills intervention on student learning: A meta-analysis. Review of Research in Education, 66, 99–136.
26.
HigginsE.T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 1–46.
27.
HorwitzE.K.HorwitzM.B.CopeJ. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70, 125–132.
28.
JohnsonD.W.JohnsonR.T.RosethC.J. (2012). Competition and performance: More facts, more understanding? Comment on Murayama and Elliot (2012). Psychological Bulletin, 138, 1071–1078.
29.
KangS.J. (2005). Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language. System, 33, 277–292.
30.
KellerP.A. (2006). Regulatory focus and efficacy of health messages. Journal of Consumer Research, 33, 109–114.
31.
KhajavyG.H.MacIntyreP.D.BarabadiE. (2018). Role of the emotions and classroom environment in willingness to communicate: Applying doubly latent multilevel analysis in second language acquisition research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 605–624.
32.
KhajavyG.H.GhonsoolyB.Hosseini FatemiA.ChoiC.W. (2016). Willingness to communicate in English: A microsystem model in the Iranian EFL classroom context. TESOL Quarterly, 50, 154–180.
MacIntyreP.D. (1994). Variables underlying willingness to communicate: A causal analysis. Communication Research Reports, 11, 135–142.
35.
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.
36.
MacIntyreP.D.BakerS.C.ClémentR.DonovanL.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, 537–564.
37.
MacIntyreP.BakerS.ClémentR.DonovanL. (2003). Talking in order to learn: Willingness to communicate and intensive language programs. Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 589–608.
38.
MacIntyreP.D.BurnsC.JessomeA. (2011). Ambivalence about communicating in a second language: A qualitative study of French immersion students’ willingness to communicate. The Modern Language Journal, 95, 81–96.
39.
MacIntyreP.D.DörnyeiZ.ClémentR.NoelsK.A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 545–562.
40.
McCroskeyJ.C.RichmondV.P. (1990). Willingness to communicate: Differing cultural perspectives. Southern Journal of Communication, 56, 72–77.
41.
MoldenD.C.MieleD.B. (2008). The origins and influences of promotion-focused and prevention-focused achievement motivations. Advances in Motivation and Achievement: Social Psychological Perspectives, 15, 81–118.
42.
MoldenD.C.LeeA.Y.HigginsE.T. (2008). Motivations for promotion and prevention. In ShahJ.GardnerW. (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 169–187). New York: Guilford Press.
43.
MuirC.DörnyeiZ. (2013). Directed motivational currents: Using vision to create effective motivational pathways. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 3, 357–375.
44.
PawlakM.Mystkowska-WiertelakA.BielakJ. (2016). Investigating the nature of classroom willingness to communicate (WTC): A micro-perspective. Language Teaching Research, 20, 654–671.
45.
PekrunR.CusackA.MurayamaK.ElliotA.J.ThomasK. (2014). The power of anticipated feedback: Effects on students’ achievement goals and achievement emotions. Learning and Instruction, 29, 115–124.
46.
PengJ.E. (2012). Towards an ecological understanding of willingness to communicate in EFL classrooms in China. System, 40, 203–213.
47.
PengJ.E. (2019). The roles of multimodal pedagogic effects and classroom environment in willingness to communicate in English. System, 82, 161–173.
48.
PengJ.E.WoodrowL. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English: A model in the Chinese EFL classroom context. Language Learning, 60, 834–876.
49.
SansoneC. (1989). Competence feedback, task feedback, and intrinsic interest: An examination of process and context. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 343–361.
50.
ShahJ.HigginsT.FriedmanR.S. (1998). Performance incentives and means: How regulatory focus influences goal attainment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 285–293.
51.
ShinJ.LeeY.K.SeoE. (2017). The effects of feedback on students’ achievement goals: Interaction between reference of comparison and regulatory focus. Learning and Instruction, 49, 21–31.
52.
Steele-JohnsonD.HeintzP.Jr.MillerC.E. (2008). Examining situationally induced state goal orientation effects on task perceptions, performance, and satisfaction: A two-dimensional conceptualization. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 334–365.
TavakoliM.ZarrinabadiN. (2018). Differential effects of explicit and implicit corrective feedback on EFL learners’ willingness to communicate. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 12, 247–259.
55.
UrquhartC. (2012). Grounded theory for qualitative research: A practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
56.
WeaverC. (2005). Using the Rasch model to develop a measure of second language learners’ willingness to communicate within a language classroom. Journal of Applied Measurement, 6, 396–415.
57.
WenW.P.ClémentR. (2003). A Chinese conceptualization of willingness to communicate in ESL. Language Culture and Curriculum, 16, 18–38.
58.
WinneP.H.ButlerD.L. (1994). Student cognition in learning from teaching. In HusenT.PostlewaiteT. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (pp. 5738–5745). Oxford: Pergamon.
59.
YashimaT. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86, 54–66.
60.
YashimaT.MacIntyreP.D.IkedaM. (2018). Situated willingness to communicate in an L2: Interplay of individual characteristics and context. Language Teaching Research, 22, 115–137.
61.
YorkeM. (2003). Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice. Higher Education, 45, 477–501.
62.
ZarrinabadiN. (2014). Communicating in a second language: Investigating the effect of teacher on learners’ willingness to communicate. System, 42, 288–295.
63.
ZarrinabadiN.KetabiS.TavakoliM. (2019). Using a person-centred future time perspective intervention to enhance EFL Learners’ willingness to communicate. RELC Journal, 50, 341–349.
64.
ZarrinabadiN.LouN. M.ShirzadM. (2021). Autonomy support predicts language mindsets: Implications for developing communicative competence and willingness to communicate in EFL classrooms. Learning and Individual Differences, 86, 101981.
65.
ZhangJ.BeckmannN.BeckmannJ.F. (2019). One situation doesn’t fit all: Variability and stability of state willingness to communicate in a Chinese College English classroom. Language Teaching Research. Epub ahead of print 3 December 2019. DOI: 10.1177/1362168819891330.
