Willingness to communicate in english of first year students at felte ulis vnu

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION

GRADUATION PAPER

WILLINGNESS TO COMMUNICATE IN ENGLISH OF
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS AT FELTE, ULIS, VNU

Supervisor: Nguyễn Thu Hiền
Student: Nguyễn Thị Hương Giang
Course: QH2014.F1.E2

HANOI – 2018


I hereby state that I: Nguyen Thi Huong Giang, class QH2014.F1.E2, being a
candidate for the degree of Bachelor of Arts accept the requirements of the College relating
to the retention and use of Bachelor’s Graduation Paper deposited in the library.

In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in the
library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance with the
normal conditions established by the librarian for the care, loan or reproduction of the paper.

Signature

May 31, 2018


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgement...........................................................................................................i
Abstract ......................................................................................................................... ii
Lists of abbreviations, tables, and figures ................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
List of tables ..................................................................................................................iv
List of figures .................................................................................................................v
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................1
1.1. Rationales for the study ..........................................................................................1
1.2. Statement of research problems and questions.........................................................1
1.3. Scope of research ......................................................................................................2
1.4. Significance ............................................................................................................2
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................3
2.1. Willingness to communicate ...................................................................................3
2.2. The importance of WTC in the context of English language learning ...................3
2.3. Factors affecting WTC of EFL students .................................................................5
2.3.1. Heuristic Model of Variables Influencing WTC by MacIntyre, Clement, Dornyei,
Noels (1998) ....................................................................................................................5
2.3.2. Factors affecting WTC in L2 ...............................................................................16
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .............................................................................20
3.1. Participants of the study .........................................................................................20
3.2. Data collection instruments ....................................................................................20
3.2.1. Questionnaire ......................................................................................................20
3.2.2. Semi-structured Interview ...................................................................................21
3.3. Data analysis ...........................................................................................................22
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .........................................................23
4.1. Willingness to communicate in English in class of the first year students at
FELTE, ULIS, VNU ......................................................................................................23
4.1.1. WTC in Casual conversations .............................................................................24
4.1.2. WTC in Task-related conversations ....................................................................26
4.2. Factors affecting WTC in English in classroom ....................................................28

4.2.2. Personality traits .................................................................................................31
4.2.3. Motivation ............................................................................................................32
4.2.4. L2 perceived competence ....................................................................................33
4.2.5. Performance conditions.......................................................................................34
4.2.6. Topical knowledge ............................................................................................... 34
4.3. Further information from the semi-structure interview ..........................................35
4.3.1. The level of WTC of the first year students at FELTE, ULIS, VNU ....................35
4.3.2. The factors affecting WTC of the first year students at FELTE, ULIS, VNU......37
Motivation ......................................................................................................................37
Chapter 5: CONCLUSION ........................................................................................39
5.1. Summary of the findings: .......................................................................................39
5.2. Pedagogical implications ........................................................................................40
5.3. Limitations and suggestions for further research ...................................................40
REFERENCE...............................................................................................................41
APPENDICES ..............................................................................................................44


Acknowledgement
I would like to thank the Faculty of English Language Teacher Education, University
of Languages and International Studies for offering me an opportunity to do my
graduation paper, which enables me to gain a lot of valuable experience in my learning
and my preparation for future career.
I wish to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Nguyen Thu Hien, for her
kindness, her support, her patience, her tolerance, her precious suggestions and
valuable advice, all of which encouraged me to complete my graduation paper.
I would also like to thank all the students for their participation in my study.

i

Abstract
One of the main purposes of learning a foreign language is to use it to communicate in
an effective way. However, whether the EFL students are willing to use English to
communicate has been a question to most of the English teachers. Given the important
role of willingness to communicate (WTC) in learning English, there have been a
number of studies about the level of WTC and the factors affecting WTC. This study is
conducted to investigate the level of willingness to communicate (WTC) in English of
EFL first year students at the University of Languages and International Studies
(ULIS) and to identify the factors that influence the WTC in English of the
participants. In order to find the answers to the research questions, two types of data
collection instruments were used: a questionnaire and a semi-structured interview.
Both the questionnaire and the interview aimed at measuring the level of WTC in
English of the participants across different communication situations inside classroom
and the factors that affect their WTC in class. The findings show that the WTC in
English in class of the EFL first year students at ULIS is relatively high. First year
students seemed to prefer initiating communication in English in group discussion to
speaking in front of the whole class. Regarding the factors affecting the student‟s
WTC, the desire to enhance the English speaking skill is the most influential variable.
In addition, some pedagogical recommendations are also provided for the purpose of
encouraging students to communicate in class.

ii


List of abbreviations

WTC:

Willingness to communicate

EFL:

English as a Foreign Language

L2:

Second language

iii


List of tables

Table 1. WTC in Casual conversations .........................................................................25
Table 2. WTC in Task-related conversations ................................................................ 27
Table 3. Summary of the student‟s preferable types of communicative situation ........30
Table 4. Summary of the student‟s personality traits ....................................................31
Table 5. Summary of the student‟s motivation ............................................................. 32
Table 6. Summary of the student‟s L2 perceived competence......................................33
Table 7. Summary of the student‟s performance conditions .........................................34

iv


List of figures

Figure 1. Heuristic Model of Variables Influencing WTC .............................................6
Figure 2. Willingness to communicate in English in class of the first year students in
FELTE, ULIS, VNU ......................................................................................................23

Figure 3. Factors affecting WTC in English .................................................................29

v


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1.

Rationales for the study

In recent years, English has played an integral part in the context of global
communication as English serves various purposes, ranging from entertainment to
international businesses. It is also considered „a „contact language‟ between persons
who share neither a common native tongue nor a common (national) culture, and for
whom English is the chosen foreign language of communication‟ (Seidlhofer, 2011,
p.339). Given its prominent role in communication, there is a growing tendency in
learning English in a number of countries including Vietnam. In the context of
learning English as a core subject at school, students normally study English as a
subject rather than a means to communicate. However, the goal of learning a second
language (L2) or a foreign language (FL) is to communicate and understand people
from different cultures. Therefore, communicative goal in learning another language
should be emphasized (Aliakbari, Kamangar, and Khany, 2016).
Willingness to communicate (WTC) in English is believed to exert a significant
influence on a student‟s L2 language use (Hashimoto, 2002). Willingness to
communicate is defined as a learner‟s „„readiness to enter into discourse at a particular
time with a specific person or persons, using a L2” (MacIntyre, Clement, Dornyei &
Noels, 1998, p. 547). WTC in L2 has been examined in a number of studies around the
world (Hashimoto, 2002; Yashima, 2002; Nation & Newton, 2009; Mahdi, 2014).
These studies indicate that WTC has certain influences on an individual‟s L2 use, and
there are a number of factors affecting one‟s WTC. However, there has been little

effort in investigating WTC of English learners in Vietnam. Therefore, the researcher
would like to investigate how willing the students in Vietnam are to communicate in
English and what factors are likely to affect their communication in English.
1.2. Statement of research problems and questions
Given the emphasized goal of learning English as to communicate effectively,
willingness to communicate is of primary concern as a factor that is related to
communication competence and attitudes of students. Furthermore, language and
communication belong to cultural matters (Yashima, 2002). McCroskey and
Richmond (1990) also suggested that the relationship between WTC and diverse
1


variables considerably varies in different cultures. There have been several studies
investigating the WTC in English as a second language, such as WTC in English of
Iranian students (Aliakbari, Kamangar, & Khany, 2016), Japanese students (Yashima,
2002), Pakistan students (Bukhari, Cheng, & Khan, 2015). However, there has been
little concern about WTC in English of Vietnamese students, which probably has
certain different features, when compared with that of students from other country.
Furthermore, it is also claimed that WTC in English is able to have specific significant
influences on the practice of learning English among Vietnamese students.
In the light of those concerns, the researcher conducts an investigation to answer the
following questions about students in FELTE, ULIS, VNU:
1. How willing are the first year students to communicate in English when
they have an opportunity in class?
2. What are the factors perceived by the students to affect their willingness
to communicate in English in class?
1.3. Scope of research
There have been a number of studies investigating the WTC of students learning
English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in some other countries (Hashimoto, 2002;
Yashima, 2002; Mahdi, 2014; Haidara, 2016). WTC could refer to willingness to

communicate in both written and spoken forms (Yashima, 2002). This concept was
also studied inside and outside the context of classroom. However, within the scope of
this study, WTC is studied inside classroom in the form of speaking. Specifically, this
study investigates first year EFL student‟s WTC in English in class and the factors as
perceived by students to affect their WTC.
1.4.

Significance

As one of the few studies investigating the willingness to communicate in English of
the first year students at FELTE, ULIS, VNU in classroom context, this study will
raise the awareness of teachers and students about the important role of WTC in
language teaching and learning and the possible factors that may influence students‟
WTC. The pedagogical implications provided in this study are expected to be helpful
to English language teachers of first year student at ULIS, VNU in motivating their
students to communicate in English in classroom.
2


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.

Willingness to communicate

The concept WTC originally refers to communication in the first or native language
and it was defined as “the probability of engaging in communication when free to
choose to do so” (MacIntyre et al., 1998, p.546). WTC was also defined as the
tendency of a person to start a conversation when they feel free to do so (McCroskey
& Richmond, 1990).
WTC has been studied in both L1 and L2; however, it is believed that there are certain

differences between WTC in L1 and L2. WTC in L2 could not be a simple
manifestation of WTC in L1 (MacIntyre et al., 1998). The difference between WTC in
L1 and L2 can be caused by the different levels of language competence. The language
use in L2 would interact with the variables affecting WTC in a more complicated
manner than the language use in L1 (MacIntyre et al., 1998). L1 users are likely to
have had a great deal of competence of that language, while L2 users are believed to
have a greater range of competence from no L2 competence to full L2 competence.
More importantly, L2 use could have a relation to intergroup issues, social and
political implications, which are not relevant to L1 use (MacIntyre et al., 1998).
Hence, the WTC in L2 will vary among language users more significantly when
compared to WTC in L1.
2.2.

The importance of WTC in the context of English language learning

WTC has long been believed to play a significant role in the process of language
learning (Hashimoto, 2002; Baghaei, 2012; Bergil, 2016). For instances, it was
claimed that there was a correlation between WTC and the frequency of L2 use
(Hashimoto, 2002), WTC and language achievement (Mahmoodi & Moazam, 2014),
WTC and overall speaking skills (Bergil, 2016). As such, the WTC is likely to have
important influences on L2 learning.
There is a significant positive correlation between WTC and motivation to learn a L2
and the frequency of L2 communication (Hashimoto, 2002). The students with higher
level of willingness to communicate will have more motivation to speak English in
class, so the frequency of using English to communicate also increases. Furthermore,
3


motivation is regarded as a determining factor the process of learning a L2; therefore,
the role of WTC should be emphasized in the pedagogy of L2 learning. In addition to

this, it is reported that WTC has diverse effects on an EFL student‟s overall speaking
skills (Bergil, 2016). Mahmoodi and Moazam (2014) also claimed that there could be
a correlation between WTC and language achievement in the sense that the students
who are more willing to communicate in English would be more likely to be high at
language achievement. Similarly, those with high L2 achievement tend to show higher
level of WTC in English.
In general, WTC plays a vital role in L2 learning process because WTC can have
diverse influences on different aspects of L2 learning such as motivation, success in
L2 learning and overall speaking performance. Hence, WTC of EFL students should
be taken into consideration as a focus of the research on L2 learning.
Given its prominent role in L2 learning, the level of WTC of EFL students has been of
great interest among the studies on language teaching and learning. Because WTC in
L2 is not a permanent trait, the level of WTC can vary among different groups of EFL
learners. A number of studies have been conducted in order to investigate the WTC of
EFL students in different contexts in a number of countries including Japan
(Hashimoto, 2002; Yashima, 2002), Iran (Mahmoodi & Moazam, 2014), and
Indonesia (Haidara, 2016). It is reported that EFL students could have different levels
of WTC in certain situations. For instance, students tend to be more willing to
participate in a discussion than to make a presentation in front of their class (Khabiti &
Zakeri, 2014).
There have been different scales to measure the WTC of EFL students in class.
Macintyre, Baker, Clement, Conrod (2001) applied a WTC scale to measure the
percentage of time the students would choose to communicate in each type of
communication tasks in class such as talking in small groups, or speaking in public, or
communicating in daily conversation. Zarrinabadi and Abdi (2011) developed a scale
based on the model of MacIntyre and his associates to investigate the WTC of Iranian
EFL learners. In the model of Zarrinabadi and Abdi (2011), the WTC scale included
27 items, each of which ranges from 1 to 5 (1 = almost never willing, 2 = sometimes
willing, 3 = willing half of the time, 4 = usually willing, and 5 = almost
4

always willing). The items were used to ask students how much they were willing to
communicate inside classroom in all four skills including speaking, listening, reading,
writing. The results of this study by Zarrinabadi and Abdi (2011) indicated a relation
between WTC and language learning orientations.
To sum up, WTC could be considered as one of the important variables affecting
different aspects of L2 learning and L2 use. Therefore, a number of studies have been
conducted to investigate the level of EFL student‟s WTC which had a relation to the
language learning process.
2.3.

Factors affecting WTC of EFL students

2.3.1. Heuristic Model of Variables Influencing WTC by MacIntyre, Clement,
Dornyei, Noels (1998)
MacIntyre and his associates (1998) developed a heuristic model of variables
influencing WTC in Figure 1. This heuristic model represents a number of variables
that could be the predictors of WTC. The interrelations of those factors are presented
in a pyramid-shaped model. The top of the pyramid model is the starting point when
one is about to communicate using a L2, which is influenced by both situational
factors and enduring factors. The organization of the layers of the pyramid represents
the level of influences of each factor to WTC and the use of L2 in communication. It
means that the level of the relation of WTC with other variables could be indicated by
“the immediacy of some factors and the relatively distal influence of others”
(MacIntyre et al., 1998). Prior to further explanation of these variables, the researcher
will give a differentiation between two types of factors which are enduring factors and
situational factors. MacIntyre (1998) stated that the enduring influences such as
international postures or personality refer to “stable, long-term properties of the
environment or person that would apply to almost any situation” (p.546). On the other

hand, the situational factors such as the desire to speak with a specific communicator,
or knowledge of topic could be considered “more transient and dependent” on the
specific contexts in which a person communicates at a certain time (p.546).

5


Figure 1. Heuristic Model of Variables Influencing WTC
These are six categories represented by six layers of the model. The six layers further
indicate two basic structures: the first three layers (Communication behavior,
Behavioral Intention, Situated Antecedents) demonstrate the situational influences
which could be regarded as immediate influences, and the latter three layers represent
the more distal influences which are the stable and enduring factors affecting WTC.
The immediacy of the influences will descend from the top to the bottom of the model,
from the situational influences to the stable and enduring influences.
Layer I: Communication behavior
Communication behavior is understood in a broad sense, which includes such
activities as speaking up in class, reading in L2, listening to L2 material, and utilizing
L2 in job. MacIntyre (1998) believed that the language teacher hardly had the capacity
to create such variety of opportunities for language students to practice their language.
Therefore, he claimed that the ultimate goal of language education is to encourage in
language learners to seek out the opportunity to actually communicate in the target
language. Accordingly, that is seen as a proper goal of language education program.
Layer II: Behavioral Intention - WTC
As previously mentioned, WTC was regarded as “as a readiness to enter into discourse
at a particular time with a specific person or persons, using a L2” (MacIntyre et al.,
1998, p.547). This definition could also mean that even when the opportunity to
6

communicate is available, the students still would choose whether they are willing to
communicate or not. What makes students communicate probably depends on the
behavioral intention. An example for this practice taken by MacIntyre (1998) is that if
a teacher poses a question in class, there are some students to raise their hands which
indicate their willingness to verbalize the answers. The reasons for this could be that
the students feel confident enough and they wish to talk to their teacher and
classmates. In addition to this, they also develop their self-confidence with their
language in general in order to comprehend the question and form a response. They
also feel motivated by “the interpersonal situation, likely a combination of affiliation
and control motives (to both please the teacher and to get good grades)” (MacIntyre,
1998, p. 548). The students learn the language course for a specific reason, maybe for
their job; therefore, this volition to speak reflects sort of motivation for language
learning including both integrative motivation (affiliation) and instrumental motivation
(control-based motive) (MacIntyre, 1998). WTC could imply the behavioral intention,
which have been studied widely based on the Theory of Planned Behavior. This theory
holds that „the most immediate cause of behaviour is the intention to engage in a
behavior and the person's actual control over his or her action‟ ( MacIntyre et al., 1998,
p. 548). Intention needs to combine with the opportunity to form a behavior. The
intention also refers to “the attitude towards the behavior and the perceived behavioral
control” (MacIntyre et al., 1998, p. 548). The theory that behavior could be indicated
by the intention or willing to act is applied by MacIntyre (1998) in an attempt to prove
a correlation between WTC and communicative behavior.
Layer III: Situated antecedents
This layer illustrates two immediate precursors of WTC which are: (a) the desire to
communicate with a specific person, and (b) the state communicative self-confidence.
a. The desire to communicate with a specific person could be supposedly result
from the interpersonal motivation and the group motivation presented in the
lower layers which will be discussed in the next layer.
The desire to communicate with a particular person can be affected by control and
affiliation. Regarding research on social psychology, affiliation often happens with

persons “who are encountered frequently, physically attractive persons, and those who
7


are similar to us in a variety of ways (MacIntyre et al., 1998). Therefore, it can be
inferred that within the context of classroom, the students will have the desire to
communicate with a specific person in class, which will possibly also affect their
WTC.
b. The state communicative self-confidence
Self-confidence involves two key constructs which are perceived competence and lack
of anxiety (Clement, 1980, 1986, as cited in MacIntyre et al., 1998). These constructs
may be perceived as relatively enduring characteristics. Additionally, MacIntyre
(1998) also stated that there has been little empirical work investigating on L2 selfconfidence. It is predicted that some situations will generate higher confidence than
others. Furthermore, a differentiation between the concept of trait-like self-confidence
and state self-confidence is also needed to clarify these two different concepts. In the
heuristic model of WTC developed by MacIntyre and his associates (1998), state
confidence is perceived as “a momentary feeling of confidence, which may be
transient within a given situation” (p. 549).
In the light of the difference between trait-like self-confidence and state confidence,
there is also a distinction between its constructs. Accordingly, there exist state anxiety
and state perceived competence. Spielberger (1983) said that the state anxiety can
“vary in intensity and fluctuate over time” (as cited in MacIntyre et al., 1998, p.549),
and anything that increases the state anxiety will reduce the state self-confidence, thus
the WTC of one person. It was also claimed that “anxiety may be increased by many
factors such as unpleasant prior experiences, intergroup tension, increased fear of
assimilation, an increased number of people listening, and so forth” (MacIntyre et al.,
1998, p.549).This could be interpreted that language students could feel more anxious
when they communicate in English if they made some embarrassing mistakes before
when speaking, which represents the “unpleasant prior experiences”. Alternatively,
students also feel unready to speak in group if that group has any tension or arguments.

Additionally, the number of people listening to the speakers also affects their anxiety
when speaking, thus influencing their WTC. In other words, students tend to feel less
willing to communicate when speaking in a larger group than a smaller one.
The state perceived competence refers to a person‟s feeling that he/she is able to
8


communicate effectively at a certain moment (MacIntyre et al., 1998). It is also
believed that given the speaker have adequate language knowledge and skills to
communicate, the state perceived communicative competence would arise when the
situation of the conversation has been encountered before. As a result, if the speaker
could be out in a familiar situation, they are more likely to be more willing to
participate in the conversation. For this reason, new situation may decline the state
perceived competence of the speakers. More predictably, if the speakers have lower
levels of language knowledge and skills, their state perceived competence will
probably reduce.
Generally, the desire to speak to a specific person and the state communicative selfconfident are being examined as the most immediate determinants of WTC.
Layer IV: Motivational Propensities
As MacIntyre (1998) said, „the decision to initiate a speech is a motivated action that
may be governed by both situation-specific and enduring influences‟ (p. 550). In this
layer, there are three groups of variables which are interpersonal motivation,
intergroup motivation and L2 confidence. As the organization of the structure
suggests, the affective and cognitive contexts of intergroup interaction affect the
motivational propensities and thus the desire to interact with specific person and the
state self-confidence in the layer above.
a. Interpersonal Motivation
MacIntyre (1998) sees the motivational nature and antecedents of each communication
act as „contributing to a particular interpersonal purpose‟ (p.550). Control and
affiliation are two purposes explaining the vast majority of communication episodes
(Patterson, 1990; Wieman & Giles, 1998; as cited in MacIntyre et al., 1998).

Control is considered a motivational orientation, which can limit the cognitive,
affective, and behavioral freedom of communicators. This type of communication
could be found in hierarchical or task-related situations. For instances, the teacher
exerts control over students in class, the students will communicate in order to express
their opinion in class, or give responses in a test (MacIntyre et al., 1998). This
situation of communication demonstrates the enduring social roles and therefore is
categorized as a „cross-situational influence‟ on WTC (MacIntyre et al., 1998, p. 550)
9


Affiliation is the other aspect in interpersonal motivation. It results from a number of
factors which belong to the personal characteristic of the interlocutor such as
„attractiveness (Dion, Berscheid, & Walster, 1972), similarity (Byrne, 1971), physical
proximity (Newcomb, 1961) and repeated exposure (Zajonc, 1968)‟ (MacIntyre et al.,
1998, p.550). Considering the context of a language classroom, these characteristics
could affect a student‟s affiliation, and thus their WTC. For instance, student‟s WTC
will increase if they have an opportunity to communicate with the one who is attractive
to the speaker, who have something in common, or who sits next to the speaker for an
adequately long period of time, or with whom the speaker has already worked in the
same group before. It should be noted that people have different tendencies of
affiliation; some people will possess higher affiliation tendencies than others. This
could result from the introversion or extroversion tendency of the personality trait.
Considering the above mentioned ideas, the interpersonal motivation is affected by
both the particular situation such as the characteristics of the interlocutor‟s personality,
the relationship between the communicators and the difference among individuals.
b. Intergroup Motivation
Intergroup motivation refers to an individual‟s sense of belonging to a specific group,
which is opposed to the social role of each person in the group. As can be observed
from the model, this particular type of motivation is affected by the intergroup climate
and the intergroup attitudes. MacIntyre and his associates (1998) also claimed that the

orientation of learning a L2 played a vital role in determining the motivation to speak
in that language. For instance, a language learner who learns a L2 for friendship or
pragmatic reasons would be likely to have more inspiration to initiate a L2 speech.
Similar to the components in the interpersonal motivation, control and affiliation are
considered two essential components in the intergroup motivation.
Control in the intergroup motivation is the motive that can result in the same
communicative behavior as in the interpersonal motivation. Communication is
initiated to maintain the social positions and it could be started by members of whether
dominant or subordinate groups often in task-related activities (MacIntyre et al., 1998).
Affiliation in the intergroup motivation is a type of motive that encourages the
interlocutor to initiate a conversation in order to maintain relationship with members
10


of another group especially due to the different group memberships. MacIntyre (1998)
regarded this motive as integrative motivation in language learning motivation, which
contrasted with the instrumental motivation. Generally, the desire to affiliate with
people who speak another language and take part in another culture has certain
influence on language study and communicative behaviors.
c. L2 Self-confidence
This factor concerns the relationship between the individual and the L2 use. As
MacIntyre (1998) stated, L2 self-confidence would not be situation-specific, and
different from state perceived competence. L2 confidence refers to the general belief
of the speaker about their ability to communicate in L2 appropriately and effectively.
It consists of two main components which are cognitive component and affective
component (MacIntyre et al., 1998). The cognitive components corresponds with selfevaluation of language skills of the speaker, while the affective component
corresponds with language anxiety, for example, discomfort encountered when the
speaker use the L2 (MacIntyre et al., 1998).
Layer V: Affective – Cognitive Context
The variables presented in this layer have less direct influences on WTC than the

specific variables mentioned above. In other words, these factors could exert their
influences on WTC via other more specific variables. There are three variables
included in the affective – cognitive context: intergroup attitudes, social situation, and
communicative competence.
a. Intergroup Attitudes
Intergroup attitudes can be comprised of two components which are integrativeness
and fear of assimilation. These factors have a relation to each other and both of them
have influences on motivation to learn a language.
Integrativeness refers to an individual‟s adaptation to different cultural groups
(MacIntyre et al., 1998). It is claimed that one of the reasons for language learning is
to „identify and affiliate with members of the L2 community‟ (MacIntyre et al., 1998,
p.552). While integrativeness shows an individual‟s orientation in attempt to
participate in L2 community, fear of assimilation tends to discourage the speaker to
use L2 to communicate. A person may feel afraid of losing their identification and
11


involvement with the L1 community, thus they may „resist L2 communication‟
(MacIntyre et al., 1998, p.552). Integrativeness and fear of assimilation are claimed to
have certain influences on an individual‟s attitudes and motivation of learning a L2.
Additionally, positive attitudes towards L2 will generate more motivation in learning
that target language. It is believed that enjoyment and satisfaction in learning will
encourage the learners to put more effort on their learning. MacIntyre and his
associates (1998) found out that the attitudes towards the L2 are likely to affect the
attitudes towards the L2 community, consequently, towards the intergroup relations.
b. Social Situation
L2 confidence is considered to be part of the experience that the speaker has when
communicating with members of the L2 community. This variable tends to affect the
attitude regarding the pleasantness to communicate in L2. However, it is claimed that
the positive feeling when speaking in a L2 will vary according to communicative

situation (MacIntyre et al., 1998). The speakers are likely to have different levels of L2
confidence, thus different levels of willingness to communicate.
Certainly, there are different ways of classifications of the factors causing variation in
different communicative situations. In this model, MacIntyre (1998) proposed five
main factors that have influences across the communicative events. These factors are
the participants, the setting, the purpose, the topic, and the channel of communication.
The participant variable is among the most influential factors, and it is about the
speaker‟s age, gender, social status, or various aspects of the relationships among the
communicators such as power relation, level of intimacy. The second factor – the
setting corresponds with the place and time in which communication takes place.
Biber (1994) categorized the types of locations into 6 domains which are business/
workplace, education/academic, government/ legal, religious, art/ entertainment, and
domestic/ personal. Each of these domains can have private and public contexts. The
third factor – the purpose is the goal of the communication discourse. Some
communicative events are featured by only one purpose; however, there is often a
group of several purposes directing one communicative situation (MacIntyre et al.,
1998). Biber (1994) described four main categories of purpose in communication:
persuade, transfer information, entertain, or reveal self. The topic is the fourth factor
12


that leads to the variation in L2 confidence and attitudes towards L2 use among
different situations. It is likely that the topical knowledge and the familiarity with a
certain register will boost the speaker‟s self-confidence, while unfamiliar topic or lack
of topical expertise may cause the speaker‟s hesitation to speak in L2. Finally, the
communication channel refers to the medium chosen to communicate. Whether in
speaking or writing, there are more subtypes of communication channel that can cause
situational variation. In general, WTC in L2 could be considered dependent on
situations to some extent.
c. Communicative Competence

L2 proficiency level would have a major effect on one‟s WTC. The language
knowledge and skills could be described with regards to the term “communicative
competence”. This could be categorized into five main competencies of
communicative language abilities including linguistic competence, discourse
competence,

actional

competence,

sociocultural

competence,

and

strategic

competence.
Linguistic competence is related to knowledge of language that the speaker has in
order to communicate effectively such as syntactic and phonological rules, lexical
resource. This category language ability could serve as a precondition of WTC
(MacIntyre et al., 1998). The second competence – discourse competence is
concerning the way that the speaker selects, arranges words, structures, and sentences
to form a meaningful spoken or written text. This could involve subareas such as
cohesion, deixis, coherence, structure of certain types of conversations. Therefore, if
the speaker has a chance to participate in a discourse that is familiar to them, this
situation will definitely boost their confidence to enter the discourse. In other words,
the level of familiarity with the discourse will encourage the willingness to
communicate of L2 learners. Actional competence refers to communicative intent with

the linguistic forms used. The key units are speech acts, in which utterances are made
in order to achieve certain goals when a person engages in a conversation. The fourth
competence, sociocultural competence indicates how the speaker can communicate
their ideas appropriately in L2. This involves cultural factors, social contextual factors,
and nonverbal communicative factors. Finally, strategic competence represents the
13


knowledge of communication strategies required to communicate. This factor could
support other competence and compensate for them so that the speaker can
communicate effectively and appropriately. The way people perceive their
communicative competence is believed to have strong influences on their WTC
(MacIntyre et al., 1998). There are those who are not competent language users but
believe they are competent show higher level of WTC. In contrast, there are those who
tend to underestimate their actual communicative competence. There is claimed to be a
cognitive link between perceived and actual communicative competence of an
individual which require more research to analyze.
Layer VI: Societal and Individual Context
The context of communication involves the interaction of the society and the
individual. The societal factor is indicated by the intergroup climate and the individual
context is feature by the personality characteristics of the individual.
a. Intergroup Climate
The intergroup climate is characterized by two components which are the structural
characteristic and the perceptual and affective correlates (Gardner & Clement, 1990).
The structural characteristic is defined along the concepts of ethnolinguistic vitality
and personal communication networks. The ethnolinguistic vitality refers to the
relative demographic representation of the two communities, that is their
socioeconomic power and the extent to which they are represented in social
institutions, such as the government, the legislation, or the church (MacIntyre et al.,
1998). The language with higher ethnolinguistic vitality is expected to be used more

regularly in daily exchanges. However, personal communication network would be
likely to lessen the influence of ethnolinguistic vitality. This network refers to the
group that the speaker often communicates and interacts with. Both the ethnolinguistic
vitality and personal communication networks make a contribution to the preference to
communicate in a L2. Another consideration in intergroup climate is the perceptual
and affective correlates. MacIntyre and his associates (1998) focused on the role of
attitudes and values about L2 community and the motivation to adapt and narrow the
social distance. The positive attitudes towards a L2 group could generate L2 learning
motivation and achievement. The desire to adapt to a new environment would
14


encourage an individual to learn the L2 and engage in the L2 community. In contrast,
the negative attitudes to members of other group may affect the WTC of an individual.
The negative attitudes can derive from an individual‟s social categorization. It has
been found out that an individual has a tendency to favor their own group when
compared to other groups. If a person engages in different groups at the same time,
his/ her membership would be varied; therefore, the social categorization will be less
influential to their behavior. However, it is unlikely that all members of a group
behave in the same way to other group, so the individual personality should be taken
into consideration.
b. Personality
Similar to intergroup climate, personality play a significant role in an individual‟s
WTC. Certain personality patterns would result in variation in the level of WTC
among the L2 users. However, it was stated that each type of personality trait will have
both advantages and disadvantages in communicating in L2.

MacIntyre (1998)

mentioned the Authoritarian personality as a type of personality that make people

think they are superior to other people and find it unnecessary or even unworthy to
communicate with other people, because they assume that other people are in lower
level and inferior to them. Another example is the “intuitive-feeling” people, who have
advantages in their high level of L2 achievement. However, these people often get into
trouble with interpersonal disagreement.
In general, personality plays a crucial role in the WTC of an individual. However, the
influence of personality would not directly affect one‟s WTC, alternatively, the effect
is channeled through more specific variables including intergroup attitudes and L2
confidence. Personality trait is reported to set the stage for L2 communication, along
with other situational factors, affecting an individual‟s WTC.
The model developed by MacIntyre and his associates (1998) presented a group of
variables that affect a person‟s WTC, and it is claimed to promote the focus of L2
teaching and learning on increase the learner‟s WTC and the authentic use of the
language, more than just grammatical rules, and linguistic competence. This model has
been applied in a significant number of studies about the WTC in L2 of language
learners in many countries. There have been a number of studies applying this WTC
15


model as a conceptual framework such as “Motivation and willingness to
communicate as predictors of reported L2 use: The Japanese ESL context”
(Hashimoto, 2002), “Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese
EFL context.” (Yashima, 200), “Willingness to communicate: A critical overview”
(Mohseni & Niknejad, 2013), “Iranian EFL Learners‟ Willingness to Communicate
and Language Learning Orientations” (Modirkhameneh & Firouzmand, 2014).
2.3.2. Factors affecting WTC in L2
Willingness to communicate has been of growing concern among studies on teaching
and learning a L2. As mentioned above, this concept refers to the tendency of an
individual to initiate a conversation in a L2 when they are free to do so. It is
undeniable that there are a host of factors influencing WTC of an individual. Whether

these factors could be permanent or situation-based and the ways they interact with
each other and with WTC have been the focus of a number of studies. Along with the
WTC model proposed by MacIntyre and his associates (1998), the findings of various
studies have indicated that there were different factors and different views about the
relations between numerous variables and WTC. However, there are some determining
factors affecting WTC that are commonly presented in a number of researches.
Motivation is among the most influential factors determining whether a person is
willing to participate in a conversation in a L2. The broad term “motivation” could be
defined in different ways. This could refer to integrative motivation and instrumental
motivation, and the attitudes towards language learning.

While the integrative

motivation refers to an individual‟s tendency to participate in a L2 group (MacIntyre et
al., 1998), the instrumental motivation is related to “the interests in learning the
language for pragmatic reasons that do not involve identification with the other
language community” (Gardner, 2001). The study on “Motivation and Willingness to
communicate as predictors of the second language use” in Japanese ESL context
conducted Hashimoto (2002) showed that there was a significant link between
motivation and WTC. This finding is also in agreement with that of the study by
Yashima (2002) in the sense that motivation would affect an individual selfconfidence, which in turn could influence the WTC in L2 communication.
Generally, motivation can be caused by the desire to learn the language for pragmatic
16