Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This paper reports on a study that investigates the impact of learning multiple foreign languages on learners’ social emotional competence development as mediated by the number of foreign languages and the recency of the learning experience. A questionnaire survey that involved 465 Chinese learners of foreign languages was administered that elicited their self-evaluation reports on how their foreign language learning experiences impacted on the 12 components of social emotional competence development which covered the five major dimensions of social emotional learning. Results demonstrate a delayed effect of multiple foreign language learning on social emotional competence development, that is, while learner’s social emotional competence is significantly influenced by their previous foreign language learning experience, their on-going multiple foreign language learning does not seem to constitute an overall influence, which is confined to only a few social emotional competence components. The results also demonstrate that the components which are significantly influenced by the number of foreign languages are mostly related to the cognitive aspects of social emotional competence, while the components which do not seem to be significantly influenced tend to be related to the behavioral aspects.

Keywords

social emotional learning social emotional competence multilingualism foreign language learning

Introduction

The concept of social emotional learning, initially defined as “the process through which children and adults develop the skills, attitudes, and values necessary to acquire social and emotional competence” (Elias et al., 1997, p. 2), has now developed as a kind of emotional competence which includes five “core social and emotional competencies in students,” that is, self-awareness, social awareness, self-management, relationship skills, and responsible decision making (CASEL, 2003, p. 5; 2012, p. 9). Specific definitions of these dimensions have also been given by CASEL (2003): self-awareness refers to an awareness of what one is, how one feels and the realistic assessment of one’s abilities; social-awareness is considered as skills to understand others’ feelings, and to appreciate and interact appropriately with various groups of people; self-management is described as the ability to regulate one’s emotions and behaviors properly; relationship skills pertain to how one handles interpersonal relationships and their integration into a group; decision-making highlights one’s abilities to make wise and responsible decisions based on a thorough and critical consideration of all of the relevant factors.

To date, a large body of research has revealed the positive effects of social emotional competence on learner’s behaviors and academic performance (Allbright et al., 2019; Burgin et al., 2021; Coryn et al., 2009; Denham and Brown, 2010; Hoffman, 2009; L. Martínez, 2016; Pasi, 2001; Schonert-Reichl, 2017; Waajid et al., 2013; Zins & Elias, 2006; Zins et al., 2004). Similarly, social emotional competence plays an important role in language learning. H. Cho et al. (2019) found that by adopting social emotional learning via various pedagogical methods such as individualizing and collaboration and support, primary school refugee English language learners were improving in language proficiency and behaviors, which could be hindered by their lower social-awareness and relationship skills. Bai et al. (2021) investigated 315 third-year students in secondary schools in Hong Kong, and found that among the different social and emotional competencies, self-awareness skills promoted self-management skills and were thus helpful for their English learning. Song et al. (2022) investigated how both multilingual proficiency and social and emotional skills were developed by integrating social emotional learning and, at the same time, adopting the translanguaging approach, that is, encouraging the learners to draw on whatever linguistic resources they have for thinking and classroom interaction.

While research has extensively investigated how social emotional learning enhances students’ academic skills and social behaviors, fewer studies have focused on how the language learning process itself can enhance learners’ social emotional competence. This creates a notable research gap, especially considering the reciprocal development of human intelligences; language learning, while enhancing linguistic competence, may also foster social emotional competence as a form of emotional intelligence (Drigas & Papoutsi, 2018). Recent studies in multilingualism have begun to explore the intricate relationship between language learning and emotions. For instance, Pavlenko (2005, pp. 188–189, 224–226) highlighted the complex nature of this relationship, noting that multilingual individuals often perceived their first language as the most emotionally resonant, while their subsequent languages evoked less intense emotional experiences. This variability in emotional resonance was influenced by socio-culturally and historically shaped emotions. Similarly, Dewaele (2007) discovered that communicative and foreign language anxiety levels were higher in languages learned later in life, though these levels diminished with the addition of more languages, as seen in trilinguals and quadrilinguals compared to bilinguals. Enjoyment, as a positive emotional response, also played a significant role in language learning (Botes et al., 2022). Other studies, including those by Dewaele (2010), Ożańska-Ponikwia (2012), Oz et al. (2015), A. Martínez and de Dios (2018), Saito et al. (2018), Back et al. (2020), and Guslyakova and Guslyakova (2020), further contributed to our understanding of the relationship between multilingualism and emotional factors. These findings suggested that language learning was not only affected by socio-emotional states but also that learners might experience emotions differently across languages, potentially enhancing emotional awareness. However, while the emotional dimensions of multilingualism have been explored, the direct impact of language learning on enhancing emotional intelligence and social emotional competence has not been systematically examined. This study aims to fill this gap by testing the hypothesis that learning additional languages may increase emotional awareness, thereby enhancing learners’ social emotional competence, particularly through cognitive and emotional aspects of multilingualism (e.g., Dewaele, 2007; Ożańska-Ponikwia, 2012; Pavlenko, 2005; Saito et al., 2018).

As can be seen from many of the studies reviewed above, the number of foreign languages one learns plays a crucial role in multilingual learning, and thus may constitute a highly influential factor that mediates the impact of multilingual learning on social emotional competence. Wilton (2009) pointed out that the negative views toward multilingualism still prevailed in Germany, for instance, “three languages are too many,” and “[t]he more languages are involved, the more threatening the idea of confusion becomes.” She called for applied linguistics researchers to consider these perspectives seriously, because they might affect how multilingual learning impacted on learner’s emotions. Another factor to consider that may likewise mediate the impact of multilingual learning on social emotional competence is the recency of the multilingual learning experience, that is, whether it is a previous experience (with foreign languages learnt in the past) or an on-going experience (with foreign languages being learnt at the current moment). In the context of this study, which focuses on multiple foreign languages, it is important to note that Chinese learners typically learn English as their first foreign language, followed by additional languages that are often LOTEs (Languages Other Than English). Examining the recency of language learning is particularly relevant when these second or third foreign languages are LOTEs because they are generally much less used after graduation from universities where they are predominantly learned. This creates a clearly identifiable transition point between the active learning phase and post-learning usage. Understanding this distinction helps capture potential delayed effects of multilingual learning, as certain benefits, particularly in social emotional competence, may not be immediately apparent but could emerge over time after the cessation of formal learning activities (Xu, 2024; Ehbara et al., 2021).

To summarize, it seems still unknown how multilingual learning impacts on learner’s social emotional competence. It should also be particularly interesting to investigate the mediating effects of the number of foreign languages and the recency of the learning experience, or put plainly, how many languages were learnt or are being learnt. To fill this research gap in literature, this study, situated in China’s mainland as a foreign language learning context, attempted to answer the following research questions:

Does multiple foreign language learning impact on learner’s social emotional competence? If so, how?

Do the number of foreign languages and the recency of the learning experience influence the effects of language learning on social emotional competence development? If so, how?

Methods

Research Design

This study utilized a quantitative cross-sectional survey design to investigate the impact of learning multiple foreign languages on social emotional competence among Chinese learners. The research was guided by the Social Emotional Learning framework, which includes five core dimensions: self-awareness, social-awareness, self-management, relationship skills, and decision-making (CASEL, 2003, 2012). The study aimed to explore how different patterns of foreign language learning influence these dimensions by using a tailored questionnaire developed specifically for the foreign language learning context.

Data were collected via an online survey platform from a sample of 465 participants recruited from higher education institutions specializing in foreign language education in China. Statistical analyses, including Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), were conducted to examine the effects of previous and on-going foreign language learning on social emotional competence. This approach allowed for the identification of specific aspects of social emotional competence that are influenced by multilingual learning experiences.

Participants

The participants of the current study were recruited via www.wjx.cn, an online questionnaire survey service. The researchers sent out the invitation to participate primarily through social media and email to friends and colleagues who studied or worked in higher education institutions specialized in foreign language education in China, such as universities of international studies and faculties/departments of foreign languages in comprehensive universities. These contacts then further disseminated the invitation to undergraduate and post-graduate students they knew.

A total of 465 participants formally consented to participation and responded to the questionnaire survey. Among them, 101 were male (21.72%), 342 were female (73.55%), and 22 declined to let us know their gender (4.73%). The 413 participants who entered their age averagely aged 22.2 (SD = 8.76). The first foreign language of 462 participants was English (99.35%).

Ethical approval had been obtained from the ethical review board of the corresponding author’s institution (document number: PSY-SUR/22JJD740011-20230213-1), before the questionnaire survey was administered.

Instrument

A questionnaire survey was designed based on the Social Emotional Learning framework proposed by Collaborative Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL, 2003), which identifies social emotional learning as the process of developing fundamental social and emotional competence in students, decreasing risks to conduct problem behaviors and promoting academic progress. This framework consists of five dimensions, including self-awareness, social-awareness, self-management, relationship skills, and decision-making (CASEL, 2012).

This set of definitions seems to only show the general features of social emotional learning competence. Thus, to serve the purpose of this study, we tried to contextualize this framework so as to make the questionnaire better suit Chinese learner’s foreign language learning experiences in line with the foci of the study. A small-scale interview was conducted with 10 foreign language learners. All of the learners learnt at least two foreign languages, and they shared their language learning experiences with particular reference to their emotions and learning behaviors. For example, they described how they made decisions when learning foreign languages, how they tended to view different cultures and social norms, and how they built up and maintained interpersonal relationships in foreign language learning. Interview data were then analyzed to sort out relevant themes and contents that closely associated with one or more of the five dimensions of social emotional competence.

Based on the information obtained from these interviewees, we identified 12 components that helped specify the five dimensions of social emotional competence in the context of the study. First, we analyzed documents on the Social-Emotional Learning framework proposed by CASEL to gain a basic understanding of its five dimensions. Next, we reviewed research focusing on each dimension in relation to Chinese students’ language learning experiences, identifying sub-topics and relevant components. Additionally, we conducted a small-scale interview to gather themes related to Chinese students’ language learning experiences. Based on these findings, we finalized 12 components. The five dimensions with their 12 components are as follows: (1) The dimension of self-awareness includes four components, that is, emotion, motivation, attitude, and goal-setting. Emotion is related to learner’s awareness of their positive or negative feelings when learning (a) foreign language(s) (Strahan & Poteat, 2020). Motivation pertains to learner’s understanding of their original impetus to learn (a) language(s) (Zheng & Liu, 2021). Attitude reflects learner’s perceptions of their learnt languages and their previous language learning experiences (Song et al., 2022). Goal-setting requires the ability to know the exact aims to achieve in different learning stages (Durlak et al., 2011). (2) The social-awareness dimension includes two components, that is, values and empathy: values are concerned about learner’s general ideas about their own tolerance and acceptance of various cultures; empathy is concerned about their willingness to respect and understand others in foreign language learning activities (Lu & Zheng, 2019). (3) The self-management dimension includes only one component, that is, self-discipline, which focuses on learner’s emotional management, self-regulation and self-adjustment in foreign language learning, especially when they face difficulties (Dong, 2022). (4) The dimension of relationship skills includes the components of integration and management. Integration entails the ability to interact with others and may be affected by such factors as personality (Leng, 2023; X. Liu, 2023). Management, the other component of relationship skills, entails conflict management, cooperation, and interpersonal skills that are manifested in foreign language classrooms. (5) The dimension of decision-making includes (collaborative and creative) problem-solving, (wise and independent) decision-making, and (critical) reflection. The component of problem-solving is related to learner’s mind-set of considering group goals as their own duties and adopting innovative approaches to achieve their joint aims in group work. Decision-making, as a component, needs the learner to take advantage of the values and cultures that are familiar to them to think thoroughly and then make independent and responsible decisions for themselves and the society (M. Liu & Oga-Baldwin, 2022). The component of reflection calls for the learner to evaluate their experiences and learning results critically as their learning progresses, assessing their previous attitudes toward certain cultures or issues and adjusting them properly (Wang et al., 2021).

Based on this contextualized construct of social emotional competence with specific reference to foreign language learning in China, a questionnaire survey was formulated with 36 items examining respondents’ self-evaluated competence entailed in the 12 components of the five dimensions (see Appendix). Each component had three corresponding items. All of the items were presented in the form of statement. The respondents were asked to assess how true each statement shown in the item was, compared to their own situations, using a 6-point Likert scale ranging from “very untrue = 1” to “very true = 6.” The survey also included a part which collected respondent’s background information, such as age, L1 background, number of mastered foreign languages, etc. Reliability test, drawing on the data collected (N = 465), demonstrated that the internal consistency across the 36 items was sufficiently high (α = .879).

Data Collection

The questionnaire survey was conducted between 1 April and 6 April, 2023, using the online survey platform www.wjx.cn. Participants were invited to participate through social media and email, with the survey link disseminated by the researchers and their contacts within higher education institutions specializing in foreign language education in China. This method enabled the recruitment of a diverse sample of undergraduate and postgraduate students engaged in foreign language learning.

Upon completion of the survey, data were exported from the platform for analysis. To ensure the privacy and confidentiality of participants, all data were permanently deleted from the online database immediately after the survey was closed. Ethical considerations, including informed consent and data protection, were strictly adhered to, with approval obtained from the ethical review board of the corresponding authors’ institution.

Data Analysis

Descriptive analysis was performed to calculate the mean scores and standard deviations for participants’ self-evaluated social emotional competence across the 12 components aligned with the five core dimensions of the Social Emotional Learning framework. These descriptive statistics provided a foundational understanding of the overall levels of social emotional competence reported by the participants, facilitating comparisons across different language learning experiences.

To examine the effects of previous and on-going multiple foreign language learning on social emotional competence development, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was conducted. This analysis allowed for the assessment of differences in social emotional competence based on the number and recency of foreign languages learned. Post-hoc tests were performed for the components that showed significant main effects, providing more detailed insights into which specific aspects of social emotional competence were influenced by multilingual learning experiences.

Results

This section first reports descriptive statistics from the questionnaire survey, and then analyses the data by analysis of variance to determine the effects of the number of foreign languages learnt (NLL) and the number of foreign languages being learnt (NLBL) on participant’s response to the social emotional competence scale.

Social Emotional Competence Scores

Before descriptive statistics were calculated, scores obtained from the second item of the questionnaire were first reversed (e.g., 6 reversed as 1, 3 reversed as 4, etc.), as it is a negatively-keyed item. Tables 1 and 2 below show the mean scores and standard deviations of each of the 12 components of social emotional competence that correspond to the five dimensions of social emotional learning. Table 1 shows the scores by different NLL groups, that is, one foreign language (n = 76), two foreign languages (n = 201), three foreign languages (n = 93), and four or more foreign languages (n = 95); Table 2 shows the scores by different NLBL groups, that is, no foreign language (n = 37), one foreign language (n = 179), two foreign languages (n = 209), and three or more foreign languages (n = 40).

Table 1.

Mean Scores and Standard Deviations by NLL Groups.

		1 (n = 76)		2 (n =201)		3 (n = 93)		4 or more (n = 95)		All (N = 465)
Dimension	Component	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD
Self-awareness	Emotion	3.79	0.760	3.92	0.771	4.14	0.735	4.23	0.814	4.01	0.785
	Motivation	3.05	0.843	2.67	0.977	2.61	1.142	2.68	1.135	2.72	1.033
	Attitude	4.43	1.045	4.76	0.877	5.14	0.830	5.15	0.761	4.86	0.911
	Goal-setting	4.11	1.136	4.42	0.990	4.77	0.990	4.72	0.895	4.50	1.020
Social-awareness	Values	4.51	0.998	4.84	0.845	5.17	0.710	5.24	0.759	4.93	0.865
Social-awareness	Empathy	4.09	0.887	4.09	0.826	4.36	0.829	4.08	0.851	4.14	0.846
Self-management	Self-discipline	4.24	1.072	4.36	0.961	4.19	1.031	3.96	1.123	4.22	1.036
Relationship skills	Integration	4.67	1.055	4.91	0.908	5.10	0.794	4.91	0.876	4.91	0.912
Relationship skills	Management	4.25	0.964	4.29	0.889	4.46	1.046	4.27	0.946	4.31	0.946
Decision-making	Problem-solving	4.24	1.017	4.42	0.851	4.53	0.850	4.35	0.961	4.40	0.904
	Decision-making	4.08	0.927	3.89	1.020	4.04	0.977	3.82	1.114	3.94	1.018
	Reflection	4.47	1.017	4.68	0.909	4.95	0.769	4.75	0.922	4.71	0.913

Table 2.

Mean Scores and Standard Deviations by NLBL Groups.

		0 (n = 37)		1 (n = 179)		2 (n = 209)		3 or more (n = 40)		All (N = 465)
Dimension	Component	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD
Self-awareness	Emotion	3.74	0.868	4.02	0.737	3.99	0.790	4.29	0.821	4.01	0.785
	Motivation	2.81	1.148	2.94	1.051	2.59	0.971	2.34	0.974	2.72	1.033
	Attitude	4.75	1.142	4.78	0.886	4.89	0.886	5.14	0.877	4.86	0.911
	Goal-setting	4.30	1.146	4.47	0.966	4.52	1.063	4.70	0.889	4.50	1.020
Social-awareness	Values	4.77	1.205	4.90	0.828	4.95	0.839	5.14	0.773	4.93	0.865
Social-awareness	Empathy	4.26	1.057	4.15	0.815	4.14	0.849	4.03	0.769	4.14	0.846
Self-management	Self-discipline	4.14	1.203	4.30	0.977	4.22	1.009	3.96	1.243	4.22	1.036
Relationship skills	Integration	4.65	1.111	4.89	0.868	4.99	0.885	4.80	1.018	4.91	0.912
Relationship skills	Management	4.58	1.011	4.27	0.942	4.33	0.942	4.18	0.906	4.31	0.946
Decision-making	Problem-solving	4.48	1.005	4.36	0.919	4.46	0.846	4.17	1.018	4.40	0.904
	Decision-making	4.29	1.089	4.00	0.960	3.88	1.014	3.67	1.150	3.94	1.018
	Reflection	4.58	1.193	4.72	0.817	4.75	0.939	4.63	0.910	4.71	0.913

As can be seen from the descriptive data, the mean scores for the majority (10 out of 12) of social emotional competence components were higher than 4, which indicated that the participants generally considered themselves to be strong in all of the five social emotional dimensions. Participants’ self-evaluation of attitude (from the self-awareness dimension), values (from the social-awareness dimension), and integration (from the relationship skills dimension) was particularly positive, with means scores close to 5. Their self-evaluation of motivation (from the self-awareness dimension) was relatively low, which indicated that learner’s social emotional competence might be characterized by imbalance between different components from the same dimension.

Participants’ mean scores for most components (except motivation) seemed to increase as the NLL increased from 1 to 3 (see Table 2). In other words, it could be hypothesized that their self-evaluation might grow increasingly positive as they learnt more foreign languages before they learnt the fourth one. The only exception might be self-discipline, the sole component of the self-management dimension—while participants who learnt two foreign languages demonstrated higher competence in self-discipline than those who only learnt one foreign language, participants who learnt more than two foreign languages seemed to demonstrate increasingly low competence. This pattern could also been observed when NLBL was the grouping scheme, that is, two foreign languages seemed to be a turning point, beyond which learners might find themselves less able of self-discipline when they are currently learning more foreign languages.

Such a combined pattern of increase and decrease with a particular number of foreign languages as the turning point (e.g., two foreign languages) was observed in more components when NLBL was differentiated (see Table 3). Motivation and self-discipline seemed to decline when more than one foreign language was being learnt; integration and reflection seemed to decline when more than two foreign languages were being learnt. More surprisingly, empathy and decision-making seemed to continuously decrease as the NLBL increased.

Table 3.

Analysis of Variance on NLL and NLBL.

		NLL			NLBL
Dimension	Component	F	p	η² *	F	p	η² *
Self-awareness	Emotion	6.448	.000	0.040	3.278	.021	0.021
	Motivation	3.196	.023	0.020	5.757	.001	0.036
	Attitude	13.695	.000	0.082	2.001	.113	0.013
	Goal-setting	8.091	.000	0.050	1.061	.365	0.007
Social-awareness	Values	13.974	.000	0.083	1.319	.267	0.009
Social-awareness	Empathy	2.588	.052	0.017	0.472	.702	0.003
Self-management	Self-discipline	3.397	.018	0.022	1.266	.285	0.008
Relationship skills	Integration	3.130	.025	0.020	1.740	.158	0.011
Relationship skills	Management	0.992	.396	0.006	1.416	.237	0.009
Decision-making	Problem-solving	1.550	.201	0.010	1.403	.241	0.009
	Decision-making	1.367	.252	0.009	2.887	.035	0.018
	Reflection	4.147	.006	0.026	0.508	.677	0.003

Partial eta-squared.

Effects of Previous and On-Going Multiple Foreign Language Learning

Analysis of variance was conducted to determine the effects of previous and on-going multiple foreign language learning on learner’s social emotional competence. It should be noted that homogeneity tests, by Box’s test of equality of covariance matrices, showed unequal variance across both NLL groups (F = 1.582, p = .000) and NLBL groups (F = 1.248, p = .006). Specifically, the first round of analysis of variance was conducted to examine the main effects of NLL on each of the 12 social emotional competence components, and the second round was to examine those of NLBL. Table 3 shows all of the F values and p values obtained from the analysis.

The results demonstrated that NLL impacted significantly on eight social emotional competence components, that is, emotion, motivation, attitude, goal-setting, values, self-discipline, integration, and reflection, and that NLBL only impacted significantly on three components, that is, emotion, motivation, and decision-making. Thus, learner’s social emotional competence is significantly influenced by their previous foreign language learning experience, more specifically, the number of foreign languages they learnt; nonetheless, their on-going multiple foreign language learning, as is observed via the number of foreign languages being learnt, does not seem to constitute an overall influence, which is confined to only a few social emotional competence components. When effect sizes were taken into consideration, however, only attitude and values reached medium effect sizes as NLL impacted on learner’s social emotional competence, and all of the three components, that is, emotion, motivation, and decision-making, that were significantly impacted by NLBL only demonstrated quite small effect sizes.

It can also be seen that the components which were significantly influenced by NLL were mostly related to the cognitive aspects of social emotional competence such as the dimensions of self-awareness and social-awareness, and that the components which did not seem to be significantly influenced tended to be related to the behavioral aspects such as the dimensions of relationship skills and decision-making. It is thus rather likely that multiple foreign language learning may primarily or more prominently affect the cognitive aspects of social emotional competence.

Post-Hoc Tests for NLL and NLBL

Post-hoc tests were conducted to further investigate the relationship between the specific numbers of foreign languages learnt/being learnt and learner’s social emotional competence development. Levene’s tests of equality of error variances were first conducted as homogeneity tests. Bonferroni scores were adopted for the social emotional competence components when equal variances were assumed, while Dunnett C’s scores were adopted for those without equal variances. Table 4 shows the comparisons that were tested significant (p < .05).

Table 4.

Post-Hoc Tests for NLL and NLBL.

Dimension	Component	NLL*	NLBL**
Self-awareness	Emotion	1 < 3, 1 < 4, 2 < 4	0 < 3
	Motivation	1 > 2, 1 > 3	1 > 2, 1 > 3
	Attitude	1 < 3, 1 < 4, 2 < 3, 2 < 4	——
	Goal-setting	1 < 3, 1 < 4, 2 < 3	——
Social-awareness	Values	1 < 3, 1 < 4, 2 < 3, 2 < 4	——
Social-awareness	Empathy	——	——
Self-management	Self-discipline	2 > 4	——
Relationship skills	Integration	1 < 3	——
Relationship skills	Management	——	——
Decision-making	Problem-solving	——	——
	Decision-making	——	0 > 3
	Reflection	1 < 3	——

*1 = 1 language, 2 = 2 languages, 3 = 3 languages, 4 = 4 or more languages.

**0 = no language, 1 = 1 language, 2 = 2 languages, 3 = 3 or more languages.

As can be seen, as to the effects of NLL, the post-hoc tests demonstrated a clear threshold, that is, three foreign languages, for the influence of multiple foreign language learning on learner’s social emotional competence to take effect. This threshold applied to six of the eight components that obtained a significant F value in the analysis of variance, that is, emotion, attitude, goal-setting, values, integration, and reflection. In other words, for their social emotional competence to develop in these components, the learner may need to learn at least three foreign languages. Interestingly, learning more than three foreign languages did not seem to demonstrate further enhanced influence on social emotional competence development compared to learning three foreign languages. Reversely, learning more than three foreign languages even contributed to a significant decrease in self-discipline compared to learning two foreign languages. Besides, learning two or three foreign languages seemed to demotivate the learner as compared to learning only one foreign language.

As to the effects of NLBL, the post-hoc tests demonstrated that motivation decreased if the learner was learning two or three foreign languages as compared to learning only one foreign language. It can thus be inferred that motivation, as a social emotional competence component, is most sensitively responsive to multiple foreign language learning—it may decrease as soon as the number of foreign languages learnt or being learnt exceeds 1. As to emotion and decision-making, both of which also tested significant in the analysis of variance, the effects of multiple foreign language learning seemed to take effect only when the number of foreign languages being learnt reached 3, leading to increased emotion and decreased decision-making. In other words, the threshold of three foreign languages was also identified to affect two components of social emotional competence for NLBL.

Discussion and Conclusions

So far we have examined the impact of multiple foreign language learning on learner’s social emotional competence development as mediated by the number of foreign languages and the recency of the learning experience. The results demonstrated that the number of learnt foreign languages impacted significantly on 8 out of 12 social emotional competence components, and that the number of foreign languages being learnt only impacted significantly on three components. In other words, although learner’s social emotional competence is significantly influenced by their previous foreign language learning experience, their on-going multiple foreign language learning does not seem to constitute an overall influence, which is confined to only a few social emotional competence components which only demonstrated quite small effect sizes. To a certain extent, this can be conceptualized as a delayed effect of multiple foreign language learning on social emotional competence development. More specifically, as the learner learns more foreign languages, their learning experience may contribute to their social emotional development in an incremental manner, because the learning of a subsequent language in the foreign language context may not in the first place diversify the structure of their learning experiences, but instead add to and strengthen their previous perceptions of and conceptions about foreign language learning (Xu & Pu, 2020). This indicates that the impact of multiple foreign language learning on social emotional competence development may not be instantly observable as the learning experience is on-going or has just happened. It may take the multiple foreign language learning experience a somewhat longer time to take effect than other experiences that are exclusively designed to promote social emotional learning (CASEL, 2012). In other words, the factors that directly contribute to social emotional learning do not seem to be immediately accessible in language learning. Instead, the language learning experience may provide certain crucial affordances to promote the conditions for such factors to emerge. Therefore, future research may need to further explore the more concrete pathways along which such conditions are promoted in and via multiple foreign language learning.

It can also be seen that, considering effect sizes, attitude, and values, compared with all of other components, are strongly influenced by multiple foreign language learning. These two components, by nature, reflect learner’s social cognition (Bandura, 2001; Moscovici, 2000), particularly with reference to what and how much value a foreign language or foreign languages may entail in a particular social context where foreign language learning takes place (S. Cho & Yi, 2020). This may have much to do with the instrumental nature of language learning in the foreign language context, that is, foreign languages are primarily learnt as investment of cultural or symbolic capital (Shan & Xu, 2024), which means that it does not directly involve and promote the behavioral engagement that enhances social emotional competence development.

The results also demonstrated that the components which were significantly influenced by the number of foreign languages were mostly related to the cognitive aspects of social emotional competence, while the components which did not seem to be significantly influenced tended to be related to the behavioral aspects. It is thus rather likely that multiple foreign language learning may more prominently affect the cognitive aspects of social emotional competence. Therefore, more research efforts are needed to further distinguish the effects of foreign language learning as investment of cultural or symbolic capital, which is more of a cognitive enterprise, and the effects of foreign language learning intended to promote immediate real-life communication, for which the learner needs to be more behaviorally engaged.

One limitation of this study is the absence of a control group consisting of learners who have not learned additional foreign languages beyond their first foreign language, which is typically English in the Chinese context. This limits our ability to directly compare the social emotional competence of multilingual learners with those who have not pursued further language learning. As a result, we cannot fully determine whether the observed variations in social emotional competence are solely attributable to multilingual learning or if they may also be influenced by pre-existing personality traits or other factors independent of language learning experiences. Future research should include a control group of learners who do not engage in additional foreign language learning and should consider the subtle differences among bilinguals, trilinguals, and learners of more languages to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how language learning shapes social emotional competence. Another limitation of this study is that we did not collect specific information on the additional languages learned by the participants. This limits our ability to examine potential differences in social emotional competence based on the linguistic relatedness of the languages (e.g., closely related languages like Korean and Japanese versus more distantly related languages like Spanish and English). Future research should consider including the types of languages learned as a variable to explore how linguistic similarities or differences may influence social emotional learning outcomes. Still another potential limitation of this study is that it does not account for the delayed appreciation of multilingual benefits, which may become more evident after learners have graduated and entered the workforce. The positive impact of multilingualism on social emotional competence might be underrepresented in the current study, as the full benefits of being multilingual could be more appreciated in professional and real-world contexts beyond the academic setting (Xu, 2024). Future research should consider examining the long-term effects of multilingual learning on social emotional competence in post-graduation scenarios.

Footnotes

Appendix: The Social Emotional Competence Scale (Multilingual Learning Related)

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was funded by a Research Project of National Language Commission (Project Title: Research on the Mechanism for Maintaining National Language Capacity in Less Commonly Taught Foreign Languages, grant number: ZDI145-90), “Research on the social cognition of Chinese learners of multiple foreign languages” (grant number: 2024TD002), a Fundamental Research Fund Project for the Central Universities, Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China, and a Beijing Foreign Studies University “Double First- Class” Fund (Project title: Research on the Theories and Practices in Training Multi-lingual Translators and Interpreters, grant number: 2022SYLPY003).

ORCID iD

Hao Xu

Data Availability Statement

A publicly available dataset was analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: (accessed date 9 April 2023; password: data).

References

Allbright

T. N.

Marsh

J. A.

Kennedy

K. E.

Hough

H. J.

McKibben

(2019). Social-emotional learning practices: Insights from outlier schools. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 12(1), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-02-2019-0020

Back

Han

Weng

S.-C.

(2020). Emotional scaffolding for emergent multilingual learners through translanguaging: Case stories. Language and Education, 34(5), 387–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2020.1744638

Bai

Shen

Wang

(2021). Impacts of social and emotional learning (SEL) on English learning achievements in Hong Kong secondary schools. Language Teaching Research, 28(3), 1176–1200. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211021736

Bandura

(2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1

Botes

Dewaele

J.-M.

Greiff

(2022). Taking stock: A meta-analysis of the effects of foreign language enjoyment. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 12(2), 205–232. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.2.3

Burgin

Coli

Daniel

M. C.

(2021). Exploratory study of ecuadorian teacher’s understanding of social emotional learning: An examination of primary school teachers. Gist Education and Learning Research Journal, 22, 125–146. https://doi.org/10.26817/16925777.964

CASEL. (2003). Safe and sound: An educational leader’s guide to evidence-based social and emotional learning (SEL) programs. Author.

CASEL. (2012). Effective social and emotional learning programs: Preschool and elementary school edition. Author.

Cho

Wang

X. C.

Christ

(2019). Social-emotional learning of refugee English language learners in early elementary grades: Teachers’ perspectives. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 33(1), 40–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2018.1531449

10.

Cho

(2020). Funds of knowledge and cultural capital: Working toward diversity and equity of knowledges. Applied Linguistics, 41(5), 810–815. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy062

11.

Coryn

C. L. S.

Spybrook

J. K.

Evergreen

S. D. H.

Blinkiewicz

(2009). Development and evaluation of the social-emotional learning scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27(4), 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282908328619

12.

Denham

S. A.

Brown

(2010). “Plays nice with others”: Social-emotional learning and academic success. Early Education and Development, 21(5), 652–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2010.497450

13.

Dewaele

J.-M.

(2007). The effect of multilingualism, sociobiographical, and situational factors on communicative anxiety and foreign language anxiety of mature language learners. International Journal of Bilingualism, 11(4), 391–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069070110040301

14.

Dewaele

J.-M.

(2010). Emotions in multiple languages. Palgrave Macmillan.

15.

Dong

(2022). Mindsets as predictors for Chinese young language learners’ negative emotions in online language classes during the pandemic: Mediating role of emotion regulation. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 43, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2159032

16.

Drigas

A. S.

Papoutsi

(2018). A new layered model on emotional intelligence. Behavioral Sciences, 8(5), 45. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs8050045

17.

Durlak

J. A.

Weissberg

R. P.

Dymnicki

A. B.

Taylor

R. D.

Schellinger

K. B.

(2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x

18.

Ehbara

Young-Scholten

Al-Tamimi

(2021). The role of delayed output on second/foreign language pronunciation in children. In Giannikas

C. N.

(Ed.), Teaching practices and equitable learning in children’s language education (pp. 23–44). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-6487-5.ch002

19.

Elias

M. J.

Zins

J. E.

Weissberg

R. P.

Frey

K. S.

Greenberg

M. T.

Haynes

N. M.

Kessler

Schwab-Stone

M. E.

Shriver

T. P.

(1997). Promoting social and emotional learning: Guidelines for educators. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

20.

Guslyakova

N. I.

Guslyakova

A. V.

(2020). Emotional intelligence as a driving force in the study of foreign languages in higher education. Proceedings IFTE-2020, 3, 781–792. https://doi.org/10.3897/ap.2.e0781

21.

Hoffman

D. M.

(2009). Reflecting on social emotional learning: A critical perspective on trends in the United States. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 533–556. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325184

22.

Leng

(2023). Chinese University students’ willingness to communicate, motivation to learn, and performance in japanese as a foreign language. In Proceedings of the 2022 4th International Conference on Literature, Art and Human Development (ICLAHD 2022) (pp. 435–447). Atlantis Press.

23.

Liu

Oga-Baldwin

W. L. Q.

(2022). Motivational profiles of learners of multiple foreign languages: A self-determination theory perspective. System, 106, Article 102762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102762

24.

Liu

(2023). Exploring foreign language anxiety in China. Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 8, 2471–2474. https://doi.org/10.54097/ehss.v8i.5015

25.

Zheng

(2019). Zhong Guo Da Xue Sheng Ying Xi Shuang Yu Dong Ji Tan Suo Yan Jiu [Exploring motivations of English-Spanish bilingual university students in China]. Fudan Forum on Foreign Languages and Literature, 1, 28–36.

26.

Martínez

(2016). Teachers’ voices on social emotional learning: Identifying the conditions that make implementation possible. The International Journal of Emotional Education, 8(2), 6–24.

27.

Martínez

de Dios

(Ed.). (2018). Emotions in second language teaching: Theory, research and teacher education. Springer.

28.

Moscovici

(2000). Social representations: Explorations in social psychology. Polity Press.

29.

Demirezen

Pourfeiz

(2015). Emotional intelligence and attitudes towards foreign language learning: Pursuit of relevance and implications. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 416–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.118

30.

Ożańska-Ponikwia

(2012). What has personality and emotional intelligence to do with “feeling different” while using a foreign language? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(2), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2011.616185

31.

Pasi

R. J.

(2001). Higher expectations: Promoting social emotional learning and academic achievement in your school. Teachers College Press.

32.

Pavlenko

(2005). Emotions and multilingualism. Cambridge University Press.

33.

Saito

Dewaele

J.-M.

Abe

In’nami

(2018). Motivation, emotion, learning experience, and second language comprehensibility development in classroom settings. Language Learning, 68(3), 709–743. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12297

34.

Schonert-Reichl

K. A.

(2017). Social and emotional learning and teachers. The Future of Children, 27(1), 137–155. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2017.0007

35.

Shan

(2024). Exploring multilingual awareness development in learners of multiple foreign languages: A social cognitive perspective. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 45(8), 3205–3218. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2092119

36.

Song

Howard

Olazabal-Alias

(2022). Translanguaging as a strategy for supporting multilingual learners’ social emotional learning. Educational sciences, 12(7), 475–490. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12070475

37.

Strahan

D. B.

Poteat

(2020). Middle level students’ perceptions of their social and emotional learning: An exploratory study. RMLE Online, 43(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2020.1747139

38.

Waajid

Garner

P. W.

Owen

J. E.

(2013). Infusing social emotional learning into the teacher education curriculum. The International Journal of Emotional Education, 5(2), 31–48.

39.

Wang

McConachy

Ushioda

(2021). Negotiating identity tensions in multilingual learning in China: A situated perspective on language learning motivation and multilingual identity. The Language Learning Journal, 49(4), 420–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2021.1915366

40.

Wilton

(2009). Multilingualism and foreign language learning. In Knapp

Seidlhofer

(Eds.), Handbook of foreign language communication and learning (pp. 45–78). Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214246.1.45

41.

(2024). The role of positive learning emotions in sustaining cognitive motivation for multilingual development. System, 123, 103323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103323

42.

(2020). The impact of multilingual education policy on university language teachers? professional development. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 84, 77–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/clac.71997

43.

Zheng

Liu

(2021). Chinese learners’ multilingual motivation and cross-linguistic variations. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 1(6), 85.

44.

Zins

J. E.

Elias

M. J.

(2006). Social and emotional learning: Promoting the development of all students. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 17(2&3), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474410701413152

45.

Zins

J. E.

Weissberg

R. P.

Wang

M. C.

Walberg

H. J.

(Eds.). (2004). Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say?Teachers College Press.

Effects of Learning Multiple Foreign Languages on Learners’ Social Emotional Competence Development

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Research Design

Participants

Instrument

Data Collection

Data Analysis

Results

Social Emotional Competence Scores

Effects of Previous and On-Going Multiple Foreign Language Learning

Post-Hoc Tests for NLL and NLBL

Discussion and Conclusions

Footnotes

Appendix: The Social Emotional Competence Scale (Multilingual Learning Related)

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iD

Data Availability Statement

References