1

Personality Assessment in SLA: Affective Traits and Their

Influence on Acquisition of English as L2

Situation Strategy Use: The Interplay of Language Learning Strategies and Individual Learner Characteristics

Sonja Babic, University of Klagenfurt, Austria

2

Introduction Theoretical background RQs, hypothesis and methodology Results, findings and discussion Limitations and further perspectives Questions and answers

Table of contents

3

Difference between learners regarding SLA Variables that have been most frequently considered in

discussions of individual learner differences are age, aptitude, cognitive style, motivation and personality factors (Ellis 1996, 104).

The role of the affective side of personality was given little attention until the Humanistic Approach (1980s).

1. Introduction

4

2.1 IDs in SLA

People differ from each other in virtually every one of their attributes and every way of functioning (Dörnyei 2009, 179).

Schumann (2004b) explains that this variation is already reflected in our brains: in spite of the usual treatment of neural structure in psychology as homogeneous and uniform, neurobiological research shows that brains are as unique as faces.

Interestingly, one of the very few mental operations in which people display a remarkable homogeneity concerns - language, more specifically the acquisition of L1

However, when it comes to SLA we can see dramatic person-to person disparity in both the quality and quantity of the attained SL knowledge and skills.

IDs as prominent area of applied linguistic investigations for the past 30 years (Dörnyei 2009, 182).

2. Theoretical background

5

2.2. Personality factors

Ellis (1996, 101) claims that personal factors are by definition heterogeneous.

Cattell (1970) attempts to measure personality using a series of dichotomies, seen as poles on continua such as cool/warm, shy/venturesome, non assertive/dominant.

Eysenck (1964) identifies two general traits, again represented as dichotomies – introvert/extravert, neurotic/stable.

SLA researchers such as Hawkey (1982) developed their own battery of personality traits calling them social styles, or even egocentric factors Brown (1981).

Dulay, Burt and Krashen (1982) even include cognitive style as personality trait.

This confusion is the result of both many-faceted nature of personality.

6

2.3 Introversion-extraversion (I-E) continuum

Eysenck (1965) describes the two personality traits, asserting that an extravert is “[…] sociable, likes parties, has many friends, needs to have people to talk to, and does not like studying by himself. He craves excitement, takes chances, often sticks his neck out, acts on the spur of the moment, and is generally an impulsive individual. He . . . always has a ready answer, and generally likes change…”

However, a “[…] typical introvert […] is a quiet, retiring sort of person, introspective, fond of books rather than people; he is reserved and distant, except with intimate friends. He tends to plan ahead . . . and distrusts the impulse of the moment. He does not like excitement, takes matters of everyday life with proper seriousness, and likes a well ordered mode of life . . .” (Skehan 1989, 100).

7

One of the intuitively appealing hypothesis that has been investigated is that extraverted learners learn more rapidly and are more successful than introverted learners.

The research results lend only partial support to this hypothesis. Krashen (1985) and Long (1985) agreed with this approach; while,

Swain and Burnaby’s (1976) research on the acquisition of French as the second language shown that the relationship between outgoingness and second language proficiency does not appear to exist.

Naiman (1978) had also “[…] found no significant relationship between extraversion/introversion and proficiency” (Ellis 1996, 120).

On the contrary, a research conducted by Schumann and Schumann (1977) shown that personality traits make a significant influence on SLA.

8

3.1 RQs:1. Does the relationship between personality traits,

introversion and extraversion, and level of competence in English as L2 exist?

2. What kind of relationship is this?3. How does the introversion-extraversion continuum

influence SLA in terms of overall language proficiency? 4. Who is the more successful language learner in this

respect?5. Is there a difference between genders?

3. RQs, hypothesis and methodology

9

3.2 Hypothesis is twofold: a) the correlation between I-E and SLA exists and is significantb) Introverted learners acquire English as L2 more successfully than extraverted learners due to the learning styles, strategies and techniques they use in learning the language

10

3.3 MethodologySample and data collection: When? The data was collected in December 2014, and

analyzed in January 2015. Where? The research is situated in Sombor, Vojvodina

(Serbia). (why there?) Who and how many? Secondary school pupils (the

graduate year); N=265 How? A test battery consisting of 3 major parts

11

1. Questionnaire (age, gender, mother tongue, school and department; success at the end the previous school years, how long they have been learning English, attitude towards it, etc.)2. C-test: The nature of the C-test – four passages long; follows “the rule of the two”: starting from the second sentence in a paragraph, half of every second word is omitted and the respondents need to fill in the empty gaps.

Towards Identifying the C-Test Construct (Günther Sigott, 2004);Der C-Test: Theorie, Empirir, Anwendungen – The C-Test: Theory, Empirical Research, Applications (Rüdiger Grotjahn, 2006); Der C-Test: Aktuelle Tendenzen – The C-Test: Current Tendencies (Rüdiger Grotjahn, 2014).

Texts at B2 level of proficiency.100 empty gapsTOEIC - the Test of English for International Communication3. Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ)Naiman, Frölich and Todesco (1995) classified it as one of the most important tests for measuring personality traits90 dichotomous questions; 24 related to I-E

12

The data analysisSPSS 20:

Descriptive statistics T-test for independent variables Pearson correlation Linear regression analysis

13

Table 1: Descriptive analysis - correlation between the variables

4. Results, findings and discussion

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

14

Table 27: Personality traits as predictors of the score on the c-test

15

Limitations:the results are not generalizing, their validity is tied to the analyzed sample: place (county, town and school), participants (age, school, etc), means of personality assessments (different tests may show different results), overall language competence (vocabulary, grammar, the language skills, etc.)

Further perspectivesInclude larger sampleRepeat the same research in different cultures and compare the resultsInvestigate on LLS employed by both I&E learners

5. Limitations and further perspectives

16

Questions, comments, suggestions…?

Thank you for your attention!