Exploring the impacts of task complexity, anxiety, and self-efficacy on L2 written production: Unraveling individual differences in TBLT

IF 1.5 3区 文学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH International Journal of Applied Linguistics Pub Date : 2024-07-05 DOI:10.1111/ijal.12582
Mahmoud Abdi Tabari, Julia Goetze
{"title":"Exploring the impacts of task complexity, anxiety, and self-efficacy on L2 written production: Unraveling individual differences in TBLT","authors":"Mahmoud Abdi Tabari,&nbsp;Julia Goetze","doi":"10.1111/ijal.12582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Applying the task-based language teaching (TBLT) approach to L2 writing research has expanded to include learners’ affective factors and their potential impact on L2 production. However, two affective factors, L2 writing anxiety and self-efficacy, have received scant research attention within the TBLT domain despite evidence to suggest that writing anxiety can diminish L2 written production and self-efficacy can promote L2 written production. This exploratory study examined the interactions among L2 writing anxiety, L2 writing self-efficacy, and L2 writing performance in a simple and complex task version. One hundred L2 learners at a university in the United States completed L2 writing anxiety and self-efficacy questionnaires before performing two written argumentative tasks of varying cognitive complexity in a counterbalanced fashion, with a 1-week interval. Correlational results show that L2 writing anxiety is negatively linked to lexical sophistication and fluency in the simple task, but positively linked to syntactic complexity and fluency in the complex task. L2 writing self-efficacy was negatively linked to lexical diversity and fluency in the complex task. Overall, L2 writing anxiety and L2 writing self-efficacy explained only very small amounts of variance in students’ written performance in both complex conditions, except for fluency in the simple task (<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 9.2%) and complexity in the complex task (<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 10.7%), which show medium-sized effects. Our findings contradict existing studies and contribute to an enhanced understanding of the role affective individual differences play in L2 written performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":46851,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":"34 4","pages":"1533-1555"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Applied Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijal.12582","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Applying the task-based language teaching (TBLT) approach to L2 writing research has expanded to include learners’ affective factors and their potential impact on L2 production. However, two affective factors, L2 writing anxiety and self-efficacy, have received scant research attention within the TBLT domain despite evidence to suggest that writing anxiety can diminish L2 written production and self-efficacy can promote L2 written production. This exploratory study examined the interactions among L2 writing anxiety, L2 writing self-efficacy, and L2 writing performance in a simple and complex task version. One hundred L2 learners at a university in the United States completed L2 writing anxiety and self-efficacy questionnaires before performing two written argumentative tasks of varying cognitive complexity in a counterbalanced fashion, with a 1-week interval. Correlational results show that L2 writing anxiety is negatively linked to lexical sophistication and fluency in the simple task, but positively linked to syntactic complexity and fluency in the complex task. L2 writing self-efficacy was negatively linked to lexical diversity and fluency in the complex task. Overall, L2 writing anxiety and L2 writing self-efficacy explained only very small amounts of variance in students’ written performance in both complex conditions, except for fluency in the simple task (R2 = 9.2%) and complexity in the complex task (R2 = 10.7%), which show medium-sized effects. Our findings contradict existing studies and contribute to an enhanced understanding of the role affective individual differences play in L2 written performance.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索任务复杂性、焦虑和自我效能对 L2 书面表达的影响:揭示 TBLT 中的个体差异
将任务型语言教学法(TBLT)应用于 L2 写作研究的范围已经扩大到学习者的情感因素及其对 L2 写作的潜在影响。然而,尽管有证据表明,写作焦虑会降低 L2 写作水平,而自我效能感会促进 L2 写作水平,但在 TBLT 领域,L2 写作焦虑和自我效能感这两个情感因素却很少受到研究关注。这项探索性研究考察了简单和复杂任务版本中的 L2 写作焦虑、L2 写作自我效能感和 L2 写作表现之间的相互作用。美国一所大学的 100 名 L2 学习者在完成两个认知复杂程度不同的书面论证任务之前,以平衡的方式填写了 L2 写作焦虑和自我效能感问卷,间隔时间为 1 周。相关结果显示,在简单任务中,第二语言写作焦虑与词汇复杂性和流畅性呈负相关,但在复杂任务中,与句法复杂性和流畅性呈正相关。在复杂任务中,二级写作自我效能感与词汇多样性和流畅性呈负相关。总体而言,除了简单任务中的流畅性(R2 = 9.2%)和复杂任务中的复杂性(R2 = 10.7%)显示出中等程度的影响外,L2 写作焦虑和 L2 写作自我效能感只解释了学生在两种复杂条件下书面表现的极小量变异。我们的研究结果与现有研究相矛盾,有助于加深对情感个体差异在 L2 书面表现中所起作用的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Applied Linguistics (InJAL) publishes articles that explore the relationship between expertise in linguistics, broadly defined, and the everyday experience of language. Its scope is international in that it welcomes articles which show explicitly how local issues of language use or learning exemplify more global concerns.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The big global issues: Applied linguists and transdisciplinarity beyond SLA Influential sociocultural factors on teacher agency in times of educational change: Reflection from a Southeast Asian context Social presence and other individual differences in asynchronous English communication Unveiling the complexity of L2 learners’ emotions and emotion regulation: A retrodictive qualitative modeling study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1