See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/216308648

Aptitude, Attitude and Motivation in Second Language Proficiency: A Test Of

Clement's Model

Article  in  Journal of Language and Social Psychology · March 1985

DOI: 10.1177/0261927X8500400102

CITATIONS READS

200 3,639

2 authors, including:

Richard Clément
University of Ottawa
146 PUBLICATIONS   7,334 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

A cross-cultural examination of chronic stress: Hair cortisol analyses in healthy Chinese and White women View project

Motivation and Language Learning View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Richard Clément on 29 August 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

APTITUDE, ATTITUDE AND MOTIVATION
IN SECOND LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY:
A TEST OF CLEMENT’SMODEL’
Richard C l h e n t and Bastian G. Kruidenier
Scliool of Psychology, Uuiversity of Ottawa

Abstract This article presents a test of CICment’s model of second language

proficiency using .the causal modelling technique. Data pertaining to attitudes,
aptitude, motivation and second language proficiency were collected from 1,180
francophone students enrolled in grades 7 , 9 and 11 in schools of eastern QuCbec
(Canada). The results of the analysis using the LISREL V computer package
support the hypothetical constructs and causal sequence posited by ClCment.
Furthermore, the generality of the model is supported by the cross-grade replica-
bility of the obtained statistical solution. Finally, additional causal links and
correlations obtained through refinement of the model suggest avenues for future
study. These results are discussed within the context of current social psychologi-
cal models of second language proficiency.

Research pertaining to the social psychological aspects of second language acqui-

sition has, in recent years, often been justified on the basis of its conceptual
filiation to a few theoretical models such as Lambert’s (1963,1967) and Gardner’s
(e.g. Gardner, 1979, 1981, 1983, in press; Gardner & Smythe, 1975). The
theoretical conjectures proposed by these authors have instigated a plethora of
empirical studies (see for review, C l h e n t , 1978; Clement & Kruidenier, 1983;
Gardner, 1981), demonstrating their usefulness as hypothesis-generating frame-
works. Recent years have also witnessed the development of numerous theoreti-
cal conceptualisations of second language acquisition. Gardner (in press), for
example, discusses eight such models. Within the context of theory-driven
research, the investigator is, consequently, left with the task of justifying the
choice of a preferred conceptualisation. In the following, we will present the
argumentation leading to the choice and empirical test of CICment’s (1980) model
of second language proficiency.
A n empirical endeavour should be preceded by the elaboration or choice of a
theoretical model on the basis of epistemologically relevant criteria. Given
models of second language acquisition which are currently available, the criteria
of pertinence, generality and refutability would appear to be of importance. Here,
we shall focus on a subset of the models discussed by Gardner (in press) which
appear to be most pertinent to the study of social psychological aspects of second
0261-927X/85/01/0021-17
$02.50/0 0 1985, R. CICrnent& B. G . Kruidenier
JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL PSYClIOLOGY Vol. 4, No. 1,1985

21
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
22 LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

language proficiency. These are what Gardner refers to as the ‘intergroup model’
(Giles & Byrne, 1982), the ‘social context model’ (Clement, 1980) and Gardner’s
own ‘socio-educational model’. The label reflects the particular relevance of these
models to specific issues and application contexts, relevance which is translated in
terms of emphasis on selected constructs. Depending on the particular problem
studied by the researcher, one model might be more relevant than another.
In all cases, however, the psychological processes determining the individual’s
behaviour are embedded within a theoretical representation of the social context.
T h e treatment of this particular aspect has implications for the generality and
refutability of the models. In the case of Gardner’s (in press) model, the influence
of the social context is at three levels: the cultural beliefs which determine
attitudes, the attitudes toward the learning situation; and the formal or informal
nature of the learning situation. In a recent study of this model, Gardner &
Lalonde (1983) operationalised cultural beliefs as the student’s opinions concern-
ing the importance of learning objectives in the second language course and the
opportunity to use the second language. This, as well as the label used by Gardner
t o describe the model, therefore, suggest that Gardner’s model is particularly
relevant to language achievement in school situations.
Giles & Byrne’s (1982) model refers to characteristics of inter-group relations
which might influence proficiency in a second language. This model, however,
presupposes that these groups are in contact, use language as an important
definition of their identity and, to some extent, compete for the control of
economic resources. The applicability of this model is therefore limited to such
situations. CICment’s (1980) concept of the social context as reflecting the relative
perceived vitality of groups and the nature of the contact situation appears to
encompass both Gardner’s classroom and Giles & Byme’s societal factors.
Clement’s model, therefore, appears to be more general than the other two.
It might be argued that the relatively detailed descriptions of processes proposed
by Gardner and Giles & Byme might contribute to the refutability of the models.
A more precise model should allow for the possibility of critical tests which would
further accelerate its evolution. Here, however, Gardner’s and Giles & Byrnes’
models meet with problems linked to the interface of contextual and psychological
constructs. In the case of Gardner’s model, although the formality of the learning
situation is precisely defined and is intuitively appealing, the definition is in terms
of characteristics of the social milieu. The individual’s psychological representa-
tion of these characteristics and their particular interaction with motivational
processes and language production mechanisms are not clear. An adequate test of
an important part of the model thus eludes the researcher.
Similar problems exist with Giles & Byrne’s model. Giles & Byrne (1982) list
five factors which might influence second language proficiency. These include
identification, ethnolinguistic vitality and the perception of permeability of group
boundaries. These factors are important and novel and can be shown to apply to
numerous existing situations. But, as formulated, the model is more of a descrip-
tive taxonomy rather than an explanation of the psychological integration of these
factors within the individual locutor. Testing of the model is therefore limited to
molar comparisons between groups and cannot address the issue of individual
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
 SECOND LANGUAGE USAGE 23

fluency as would a test of Gardner or Clement’s model. In Clkment’s model, all

aspects of the contextual-psychological integration are explicit and thus permit
critical tests of the model.
Clkment’s (1980) model (see Figure 1) concerns the socio-motivational factors
determing communicative competence in a second language. The model assumes
that communicative competence in a second language consists of linguistic as well
as non-linguistic aspects, such as persistence in second language study. Further-
more, although the 1980 version of the model exclusively concerns motivational
mechanisms, it is assumed, on the basis of previous research, that language
aptitude is also an influential determinant of competence (see Clement, 1978;
Gardner, 1979).

Figure 1 Schematic representation of individual mediational processes. (Adapted from

Clement, 1980)

INTEGRATIVENESS Primary
minus Motivational
Process

~ % \
? ~ /
~ ~ ~ (POSITIVE
appryh) Resulting
Tendency
/ Composition
UNICULTURAL MULTICULTURAL UNlC LTURAL
I
Frequency
of Community

X
Quality of
Contact Secondary
I
SELF-CONFIDENCE
Motivational
Process

I
r 1 MOTIVATION

COMMUNICATIVE Individual
COMPETENCE Outcome

Relative Status
DOMINANT NON-DOMINANT of First
Culture

Collective
INTEGRATION ASSIMILATION
Outcome
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
24 LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY.

With respect to socio-motivational aspects of the model, it is postulated that

communicative competence is determined by the sequential effect of two pro-
cesses. The first process, called the primary motivationalprocess, is rooted in the
affective regard held by the individual toward the second language community. It
has two components which act as reciprocal moderators: integrativeness and fear
of assimilation. Integrativeness, under various names, has been the cornerstone
of many theories of second language acquisition. It corresponds to the individual’s
positive affective predisposition towards the second language community. Fear of
assimilation corresponds to the negative pole of the primary process, i.e. the fear
that learning a second language might lead to the loss of the first language and
culture.
Integrativeness and fear of assimilation are posited as antagonistic forces, the
result of which determines motivation or a secondary motivational process
depending on the nature of the linguistic milieu (see Figure 1). In unicultural
milieux, where contact with members of the target language group is not avail-
able, the tendency resulting from the primary process is hypothesised to directly
determine motivation to learn the second language, which, in turn, determines
second language competence. In multicultural settings, where contact is possible,
the resulting tendency determines a secondary motivational process related to
self-confidence with the second language.
T h e definition of the self-confidence concept in Clement’s model is itself an
innovation. Previous models (Gardner, 1979; Gardner & Lalonde, 1983) have
identified second language use anxiety as an important determinant of second
language proficiency.2 In Clement’s model, second language use. anxiety is sub-
sumed by the concept of self-confidence, which also includes the individual’s
self-evaluations of second language proficiency. Research (c.f. Clement, 1978;
Clement, Gardner & Symthe, 1977, 1980) has shown that second language use
anxiety, and self-ratings of proficiency, to be highly correlated. Clement’s model
is unique, however, in subsuming them under the concept of self-confidence.
But, the causal relationships of the secondary motivational process to other
constructs probably is the major feature of Clement’s model. They represent the
major conceptual integration of the contextual and psychological factors proposed
in the model. In multicultural settings, the interplay between integrativeness and
fear of assimilation determines the frequency and pleasantness of contact with
members of the second language group. To the extent that such contact is
relatively frequent and pleasant, self-confidence in one’s ability to use the second
language will develop. In those settings, it is this self-confidence which is the most
important determinant of motivation to learn and use the second language.
T h e model also includes hypotheses concerning the collective outcomes of
second language competence (i.e. integration or assimilation) which are not
relevant to the present study (but see Hamers & Blanc, 1983). The empirical
demonstration-described here concerns those mediational aspects related to the
individual processes. Specifically, the purpose of the present study was to test the
appropriateness of CICment’smodel (shown in Figure 1) for language learning in a
multicultural setting. The test emphasised the innovative aspects of ClCment?
model: (a) the inverse relationship between integrativeness and fear of assimila.
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
 SECOND LANGUAGE USAGE 25

tion and (b) their combined effect on the secondary motivational process; (c) the
existence of the sequential effects of contact and self-confidence constituting the
secondary motivational process; (d) the effect of this process on motivation; and
(e) the definition of self-confidence as being composed of language use anxiety
and self-ratings of second language competence.

Method
Subjects
Subjects for this investigation were 1,180 francophone students enrolled in
grades 7, 9 and 11 in schools in eastern Quibec. There were 453 students (233
males; 220 females) included in grade 7,409 (202 males; 207 females) in grade 9
and 318 (157 males; 161 females) in grade 11. Respondents reported having had
between 3 and 7 years of former teaching of English (x=4.6); the majority had
learned that language in school as opposed to at home or with friends. At all grade
levels, between one-third and one-half of the respondents reported using English
at home while the average number of contacts with anglophones outside school
and home during the three months preceding the study was 5.3. This relatively low
frequency of personal contacts was, however, compensated by socio-cultural
aspects: the closeness of Northern United States, the heavy influx of anglophone
tourists in those regions and the availability and popularity of anglophone pro-
ducts and cultural artifacts via the media.

Design
A test of Clement’s model must not only verify the integrity of its concepts but
must also verify the causal relationships depicted between the concepts. In order
t o accomplish both of these tasks, the model was cast into a mathematical form
which could be tested using LISREL (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1981). LISREL V is
a computer program used to examine structural equation models (see Pedhazur,
1982) and, germane to the present study, allows a simultaneous test of the
composition o f constructs and their causal relationships. Input into the program
consists of a correlation o r covariance matrix of the variables together with
particular instructions (called ‘restrictions’) concerning two aspects of the
model: (a) the composition of latent constructs (e.g. integrativeness, self-
confidence, etc. . . .), referred to as the ‘measurement model’, and (b) their
causal relationships, called the ‘structural model’. The first step in formulating
these restrictions usually involves depicting the model in a manner similar to
what appears in Figure 2.
T h e structural model restrictions concern the latent constructs, represented by
circles, and their links, represented by arrows. Unidirectional arrows represent
causal relationships between two latent constructs whereas bidirectional arrows
represent correlations. Thus, Figure 2 presents, in structural modelling format,
Clement’s model of second language proficiency in a multicultural milieu (as
adapted from Figure 1). In Figure 2, the primary motivational process is shown to
be composed of integrativeness (INT) and fear of assimilation (FAS) which are
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
26 LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Figure 2 LISREL representation of Clement's model

Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009

 SECOND LANGUAGE USAGE 27

(negatively) correlated, the resultant of which determines aspects of the contact

situation (CON). The secondary motivational process is shown to be composed of
the sequential effects of contact (CON) and self-confidence (CONF) which
determines motivation (MOT). Motivation, in turn, directly determines linguistic
(LING) and non-linguistic (NLING) outcomes. Finally, language aptitude (APT)
is also hypothesised to influence both outcomes.
In addition to the structural restrictions dictated by the model, restrictions
related to the measurement model must also be specified. These restrictions
identify the measure or indicator variables related to each latent construct. In
Figure 2, indicator variables are represented as constellations of rectangles
around their respective constructs. The construct integrativeness, for example, is
measured by the variables, Attitude toward English Canadians (AEC), Attitude
toward Americans (AAM) and Integrative Orientation (IO).3 The indicator
variables are related in the same manner as they would define a factor represent-
ing that construct. Specification of the measurement model, therefore, allows a
test of the integrity of each latent construct by (a) providing evidence that the
indicator variables loads significantly on the factor representing each construct,
and (b) providing evidence that the variables do not load on factors representing
other constructs.
This statistical technique applied to the model depicted in Figure 2 provides
numerical estimates of the importance of the relationships depicted in the struc-
tural and measurement models as well as critical ratios (called ‘t-values’) indicat-
ing their level of statistical significance. LISREL V also estimates error terms
associated with each latent construct and indicator variable. These can be speci-
fied to be correlated o r uncorrelated.
A major advantage of LISREL is that it provides a chi-square test of the overall
goodness of fit of the model to the data. A model which fits the data would
produce a small chi-square relative to the degrees of freedom. Furthermore, the
goodness of fit can be progressively improved by the eIimination of non-significant
relationships and the addition of new links indicated by what Joreskog & Sorbom
(1981: 1.42) call, ‘modification indices’. It should be noted, however, that the final
solution thus derived is bound to the particular data at hand. As with multiple
regression, the generality of a given numerical solution should be tested through
cross-sample replication. LISREL V permits the simultaneous analysis and gen-
eration of a common solution for numerous samples, thus allowing this test of
generality. In the present study, Clgment’s model was tested using three different
age groups corresponding to students in grades 7,9, and 11.

Materials
Students answered a questionnaire in French which included items measuring
21 variables. These variables are the indicator variables depicted in square boxes
in Figure 2; Figure 2 also includes three variables provided by the second-language
teachers. All variables are listed here, grouped according to the latent construct
which they measure. Estimates of internal consistency reliability (Cronbach
alpha), are provided for those scales containing more than one item. The Cronbach
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
28 LANGUAGE A N D SOCIAL P S Y C H O L O G Y

alpha coefficient is t h e mean of t h e indices obtained for the three grade groups
tested. The list also includes a description of those variables which were developed
for this study. Descriptions of t h e other variables can b e found in Clement,
Symthe & G a r d n e r (1976), and Clement (1978). Except where indicated, all
Likert items were answered on seven-point scales ranging from ‘strongly disagree’
to ‘strongly agree’.

A) Zntegrativeriess (INT)
1. Attitude toward English Canadians (AEC) (aIpha=0.84).
2. Attitude toward Anrericans (AAM) (aIpha=0.88).
3. Integrative orientation (10) (alpha=0.78).
B ) Fear ofassimilation (FAS)
4. Ttireat of msitiiilation (TASS). This scale consisted of nine Likert items evaluating
the extent to which the student perceived a danger for QuCbec francophones of
being assimilated into the English community. A high score reflects the opinion
that cultural assimilation is a threat to Qukbec francophones (aIpha=0.66).
5. Fear of learning English (FLE). This scale included eight Likert items evaluating
the extent to which the student felt that learning and speaking English causes one to
lose one’s own French cultural identity. A high score indicates a relatively high level
of fear of losing the French identity (alpha=0.77).
C ) Larigtiage Aptitude (APT)
Three scales of the short form of the Modern Language Aptitude Test (Carroll &
Sapon, 1959), translated into French and validated by the Public Service Commis-
sion of Canada (Institut de Recherches Psychologiques, 1980) were used as indices
of language aptitude:
6. Spelling Cliies (C). Scores on this test are dependent upon the respondent’s know-
ledge of English vocabulary and ability to associatesounds and orthographic symbols.
7. Words in Sentences (D). This test is intended to measure the respondent’s sensitivity
to grammatical structure and his ability to assimilate grammatical aspects of an
unknown language.
8 . Paired Associates (E). This test measures the respondent’s ability to memorise
language material such as would be the case when learning the vocabulary for an
unknown language.
D) Contact with ariglophories (CON)
9. Qriality of contact (QUAL). This scale included six Likert items evaluating qualita-
tive aspects of the student’s contact with anglophones. A high score on this scale
signifies generally pleasant contacts with the second language speaking group
(alp ha= 0.73).
10. Frequency of contact (FREQ). Students were asked to estimate the number of
interactions they had with anglophones during the past three months.
E ) Self confidence with English (CONF)
11. Self-confidence (SC). This scale, comprising six Likert items, evaluates the
student’s confidence in the capacity to interact appropriatelywith anglophoneson a
personal level. A high score denotes a high level of self-confidence (alpha=0.74).
12. English class anxiety (ECA) (alpha=0.72)
13. English use anxiety (EUA) (aIpha=0.77)
14. Self-rating: writing English (SRW)
15. Self-rating: iiriderstanding English (SRU)
16. Self-rating: reading English (SRR)
17. Self-rating: speaking English (SRS)
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
 SECOND LANGUAGE USAGE 29

F) Motivation (MOT)
18. Motivational iriferlrify (MI) (alpha=0.78)
19. Desire to learn Engfish(D) (alpha=0.82)
20. Attitude toward learning English (ALE) (alpha=0.90)
G) Non-linguistic outcome (NLING)
21. Rehavioirraliritenfion to persist in learning a second l a n g i q e (BI). Since learning a
second language implies not only effort but also persistence on the part of the
student, one relevant non-linguistic aspect is the intention to register in the second
language course when given the choice. This was assessed, following Fishbein &
Ajzen (1975), through a single question answered on a seven-point scale defined at
one end by ‘Definitely not’ and at the other, by ‘Definitely yes’.
H) Linguistic oittconie (LING)
The level of competence achieved by the student in the second language was
measured via three indicator variables‘not included in the questionnaire but col-
lected from the individual professors at the end of the school year.
22. Firial riiark (FM). This index was the final grade obtained by the student in the
English course.
23. Teacher ruling: oral English (TROR). Teachers were asked to rate each of their
students on their ability to speak and understand spoken English on B seven-point
scale defined at one end by ‘weak‘ and at the other end by ‘excellent’.
24. Teacher rating: written English (TRW). Teachers were asked to rate each student’s
ability to write and read English using a seven-point scale defined at one end by
‘weak’ and at the other end by ‘excellent’.

Procedure
Students were tested in class groups during regular class hours. Students were
first requested to answer the attitude questionnaire in two one-hour sessions set
approximately o n e week apart. T h e first part included all the Likert-type items
while t h e second part included the remaining items. T h e testing sessions were
conducted by a n investigator who was unknown to the student. Before each
session, instructions o n the cover page of the questionnaire were read aloud to the
s t u d e n t , ensuring them of t h e confidentiality of their answers and of their right t o
withdraw from t h e study should they find any questions to b e objectionable.
A b o u t one m o n t h later, students were requested to take the aptitude test. Finally,
a t t h e e n d of t h e school year, the language proficiency measures were obtained
from t h e teachers.

Results
The purpose of this research was to test the adequacy of major aspects of
Clkment’s model of second language proficiency. Three related aspects of the
results will be discussed under separate subsections. T h e first aspect concerns the
goodness o f fit a n d generality of the model. The goals here are to assess the
adequacy of the model using o n e of t h e grade samples, to refine that model by
eliminating non-significant relationships in the measurement and structural models
(as indicated by the t-values), and adding new, unpredicted relationships to the
extent that they reduce significantly the chi-square used as a measure of goodness
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
30 LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

of fit. The second aspect concerns the extent to which the model can be generalised
across the three age groups studied here. The third aspect concerns the description
of the obtained relationships between the latent constructs and indicator variables
(the measurement model) and between latent constructs (the structural model). As
will be seen, analysis of the goodness of fit and generality of the model led to the
production of one solution which accounted for all three groups. It is the numerical
solution thus achieved which is described in the third subsection.
In order to test the model represented in Figure 2, it was necessary to collect
data from students attending schools affiliated with different boards. Specifically,
the grade 7, 9 and 11 samples each came from six geographic regions. Before
analysing the data, all indices were therefore standardised within geographical
regions, in order to remove any regional differences which could influence the
magnitude of correlations between variables. The three variance-covariance
(dispersion) matrices were also standardised, weighting for sample size (see
Joreskog, 1971).

Initial test and refinement of the model

The standardised grade 9 dispersion matrix was then analysed using LISFEL V.
The initial model was tested allowing error-terms to correlate between variables
assessing the same latent constructs with the same measurement method. Thus, the
error variances between the self-evaluation scales, between the Likert anxiety
scales and between the motivational intensity and the desire to learn English scales
were allowed to correlate. With this provision, the chi-square obtained for the initial
model was 575.6 with 234 degrees of freedom. This value is statistically significant,
suggesting that this model does not accurately reproduce the covariance matrix.
The ratio of chi-square to degrees of freedom is, however, 2.46 and therefore below
the cut-off criterion of adequate fit of 5.0 proposed by Wheaton, Muthen, Alwin &
Summers (1977) and Wolfe (1981), and retained by Gardner & Lalonde (1983). The
proposed model therefore appears to be adequate.
The model obtained for grade 9 was refined using the procedure suggested by
Lomax (1982). This procedure, which uses t-values and modification indices
provided by LISREL V, entails the addition or deletion of relationships in the
structural and measurement models which increase the goodness of fit of the
model to the data. Since all relationships depicted in Figure 2 were statistically
significant, no paths were deleted. However, four statistically significant addi-
tions were successively made to the initial model. Two of these are depicted by
dotted lines in Figure 3: a significant causal path from integrativeness (INT) to
motivation (MOT) and a significant correlation between fear of assimilation
(FAS) and language aptitude (AFT). Not shown in Figure 3 are significant
correlated specification errors between motivation (MOT) and both linguistic
(LING) and non-linguistic outcomes (NLING). The final model thus obtained
(see Figure 3) produced a chi-square of 439.9 with 230 degrees of freedom
corresponding to a ratio of 1.91, and a significant reduction (135.7, df=4,
p < 0.001) in chi-square from the initial model.

Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009

 SECOND LANGUAGE USAGE 31

Figure 3 Standardised Global Solution for measurement and structural models

Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009

32 LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Generalisation across age-groups

T h e four modifications made to the model, and therefore the final solution
itself, are sample-specific, representing the ‘best’ adjustment of the model to the
grade 9 data. The generality of the final solution was tested by applying it to the
grades 7 and 11samples. This resulted in chi-squares of 581.2 (df=230) and411.8
(df=230) for grades 7 and 11, respectively. In both cases the chi-square to degree
of freedom ratios are far below 5.0. Furthermore, all relationships were statisti-
cally significant. As with the grade 9 sample, inspection of the modification
indices and critical ratios indicated that no significantly improved goodness of fit
could be obtained by adding or deIeting paths to the grades 7 and 11 models.
In order to further test the generality of the final solution, a last analysis was
performed which involved the computation of a simultaneous solution for all
three samples. This was done by constraining parameter estimates in the final
solution (both dotted and solid lines shown in Figure 3) to be equal for all samples:
all causal path coefficients, covariances between latent constructs, and loadings of
indicator variables on their respective constructs. Measurement errors and cor-
relations between measurement errors were left free to vary within each sample.
In order to test the adequacy of this solution, a procedure described by Joreskog
(1971) and Munck (1979) was followed. The chi-square obtained for this global
(simultaneous) solution was compared to the summation of the chi-squares
obtained for the three individual solutions. If the difference in chi-square
between the ‘global’ and summed individual solutions was not significant
(evaluated at degrees of freedom equal to the difference in degrees of freedom
between the two solutions), it could be said that the global solution accounted
for the data as well as the individual solutions. The chi-square obtained for the
global solution is 1495.1 with 750 degrees of freedom. The sum of the chi-
squares for the three individual solutions equals 1432.9 with 690 degrees of
freedom. The difference between the chi-squares for the global and individual
solutions is 62.2 which evaluated at 60 degrees of freedom, is not statistically
significant. This suggests that not only are the measurement and structural
models general enough to describe the three samples, but that the magnitude of
the relationships are also highly similar.

Measurement and structural relationships

T h e numbers shown in Figure 3 correspond to the standardised parameter
coefficients estimated for the final global analysis. All causal path coefficients and
covariances between latent constructs shown in this figure are statistically signifi-
cant, providing evidence supportive of the proposed model. Thus, negatively
correlated integrativeness (INT) and fear of assimilation (FAS) jointly determine
aspects of inter-ethnic contact (CON), which determines self-confidence with
English (CONF) which determines motivation (MOT). Linguistic (LING) and
non-linguistic (NLING) outcomes are jointly determined by motivation (MOT)
and language aptitude (AFT). These results, therefore, support the mediating
role played by the secondary, self-confidence process. As well, all factor loadings
constituting the measurement model shown in Figure 3 are statistically significant,
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
 SECOND LANGUAGE USAGE 33

supporting the validity of the latent constructs. Of particular interest, the indica-
tor variables related to self-confidence (CONF) all evidence substantial loadings
and there is no indication that they should serve as measures of other constructs.
This provides evidence of the convergent and divergent validity of the self-
confidence concept.

Discussion
This research was conducted in order to test aspects of Clkment’s (1978,1980)
model of second language proficiency through the use of a causal modelling
technique. The results obtained support the adequacy of the hypothesised causal
relationships and definitions of constructs proposed by Cldment: (a) integrative-
ness was found to be inversely related to fear of assimilation; (b) integrativeness
and fear of assimilation were shown to have opposite effects on the secondary
motivational process; (c) evidence of the existence of the secondary motivational
process itself, the causal sequence of contact and self-confidence, was provided;
(d) the secondary motivational process was shown to mediate the effect of the
primary motivational process on motivation; (e) finally, language use anxiety and
self-evaluation of second language proficiency clustered together in defining the
latent construct self-confidence, supporting the definition of the concept proposed
in Cldment’s model. These results were shown to be applicable to three different
age groups, supporting the generality of the proposed causal sequence, definitions
of constructs, and magnitudes of relationships pertaining to both structural and
measurement models.
T h e relationships between motivation, aptitude and the language outcomes,
because of their apparently peculiar configuration deserve further comments.
O n e important difference between linguistic and non-linguistic outcomes is that
the former involves the display of skills which depend not only on individual
volition but also o n intellectual capacity t o perform; the latter (i.e. behavioural
intention to re-register in a second language course) is largely an act of individual
volition. Thus, one would expect, as is the case here, that the contribution of
aptitude to the prediction of non-linguistic outcomes would be minimal compared
t o that of motivation.
As expected, both motivation and aptitude contribute significantly to linguistic
outcomes. In this case (see also Colletta, Cldment & Edwards, 1983), the contri-
bution of aptitude is greater than that of motivation. The relative size of both
relationships has varied as Gardner & Lalonde (1983) have noted. They report
results in which the respective contribution of motivation and aptitude are roughly
equal (0.52 and 0.57, respectively). Gardner & Smythe (1974) report results
showing that attitude and motivation scales enter as best predictors of self-ratings
and teacher ratings of second language speaking ability. The same research,
however, shows that the role of aptitude becomes more important when dealing
with standardised tests of second language knowledge.
T h e variability observed in these results appears to be linked to the type of
linguistic criterion used in the various studies. Contextualised o r in vivo tests are
more closely linked to motivation than to aptitude while standardised tests are
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
34 LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

more related to aptitude. In the present case, it seems evident that, although both
motivation and aptitude are significant determinants of linguistic proficiency, the
nature of the task imposed on the respondents favours aptitude more than
motivation. Classroom-related evaluations of proficiency would, therefore,
appear to be more closely bound to intellectual capacity than are extra-curricular
o r contextualised performances. This is consistent with Krashen’s (1981) hypo-
thesis regarding the relationship between contextualised (‘monitor free’) versus
formal (‘monitored’) language skills, aptitude and motivation.
In addition t o supporting the appropriateness of the relationships posited by
Clement, the obtained results suggest the existence of other, unpredicted relation-
ships. First, the achievement of the best possible fit to the data required the
inclusion in the modeldof correlated specification variance between motivation
and both linguistic and non-linguistic outcomes. These relationships indicate that
the errors in the equations defining these latent constructs are correlated. Such
correlations might be due to a number of yet unidentifiable factors as errors are
presumed to be random and uncorrelated. One reason for this might be the
existence of an additional mediating construct between motivation and the two
outcomes. Clearly, further research is required here.
Second, a correlation between language aptitude and fear of assimilation was
included in the final solution. The obtained estimate was negative: students who
are more adept a t manipulating the symbolic structure of a new language were less
fearful of losing their first language. From a psychological point of view, this
correIation might be due to the fact that cognitive abilities measured by the
aptitude tests influence fear of assimilation. Another explanation would be that
the contextual factors influencing fear of assimilation (see Climent, 1980) also
have an impact on cognitive abilities. Again, further research is required to
examine these possibilities.
A third and final modification to Clement’s model was the addition of a causal
path directly linking integrativeness and motivation. Although the influence of
integrativeness on the language learning process does appear to be mediated by
contact with the target group and by the learner’s self-confidence, it also appears
t o have a direct impact on motivation. It is possible that this result does correctly
represent language learning in a multicultural milieu. However, before the model
is modified, it must be tested in other unicultural and multicultural milieux. While
the milieu of the present study was described as being multicultural, it is possible
that the eastern Quebec students who were tested represent a population which
would be intermediate between unicultural and multicultural milieux. Thus, the
direct influences of both primary and secondary processes on motivation would be
relevant.
Overall, the obtained results support key psychological processes postulated by
Climent (1980) and underline the contextual dependence of the processes which
determine language behaviour. Contact with members of the second language
group not only determines level of proficiency but also the pertinence and opera.
tion of the self-confidence process. This may help explain some divergent results
reported by Gardner & Lalonde (1983) who used LISREL structural equatior
analysis to demonstrate support for Gardner’s (1979, 1981, in press) socio.
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
 SECOND LANGUAGE USAGE 35

educational model of second language learning. Gardner & Lalonde (1983) found
that language use anxiety was determined by the student’s level of motivation and
that anxiety was not related, directly or indirectly, to a student’s second language
achievement. These appear to contradict the present results. They would, in fact,
suggest that the construct of language use anxiety should be removed from the
model. Gardner & Lalonde (1983) interpreted their results as not contradicting
C16ment’s model because they were obtained in a unicultural setting where,
according to ClCment the self-confidence process is not operative. It is also
possible, however, that the crucial difference between the two studies is the
inclusion, in the present, of anxiety in the larger self-confidenceconstruct. Thus,
the observed differences might be due to the particular composition of that
construct. This would imply that, iqdeed, anxiety would have an important role as
determinant of second language proficiency, but only as construed in CICment’s
model.
Unfortunately, Gardner’s and CICment’s model involve too many differences in
number, definition, and relationship of constructs to be compared using the
statistical procedure described here. Both models might achieve adequate fit to
the data but, given their numerous differences, such results could not be used to
judge their relative value. These difficulties take away from statistical considera-
tions the basis for the choice of aparticular model and place it within the context of
the particular epistemological considerations elaborated earlier. The unexpected
results, obtained here provide a refutation of Clhent’s (1980) formulation and,
more importantly direct attention to specific relationships which must be
accounted for in future studies. The model tested here has thus fulfilled its role as
an evolutionary device.
With respect to content, ClCment’s 1980 formulation does remain limited. The
issues raised by Gardner (in press) and by Giles & Byrne (1982) regarding the
learning context and inter-group situations cannot be overlooked. An eventual
integrated model requires conceptual tools which would allow for the full com-
patibility of contextual and of individual-motivational mechanisms. ClCment’s
representation of context as quality and quantity of contact clearly does not do
justice to the complexity of the societal milieu in which the second language is
used and acquired. One avenue which might be worth exploring is the use of social
networks (see CICment, 1984; Hamers & Blanc, 1983; Rogers & Kincaid, 1981) as
a formalism permitting the study of social contexts while, at the same time,
focusing on the individual, While this might offer an appealing perspective, it
should be clear, however, that the available models are ahistorical. It is evident
that, through the process of language acquisition and use, individuals evolve and
change their particular social context (see also Hamers & Blanc, 1983). A
thorough understanding of bilinguality therefore requires the formulation of an
interactive and historical model which is still to come.
Pending this, the present research has demonstrated the viability of CICment’s
(1980) model as a heuristic, research-guiding tool emphasisingthe importance of a
context-bound self-confidence process influencing second-languagecompetence.
Within the context of current concepts pertaining to second language acquisition,
both the expected and unexpected results shed light on the individual psycho-
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
36 LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

logical aspects of t h e influence of societal factors on individual inter-ethnic

behaviour. By t h e same token, they support the epistemological arguments
proposed as basis for t h e derivation of the model. Refutability, in particular,
permits b o t h critical tests of models and clear indications of their limitations.
Notwithstanding their relative descriptive power, models of second language
proficiency should, therefore, evolve from being solely representations of the
s t a t e o f knowIedge to formulations aIso aimed a t the advancement of knowledge.

Notes
1. This research was supported, in part, by a grant from the Social Science and Humanities
Council of Canada to the the first author. The authors are grateful to the Editor, M.
Lortie-Lussier and two an’onymous reviewers for their comments on a previous version
of this article. Request for reprints should be sent to Richard Clement, School of
Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa KIN 6N5,Canada.
2. It should be noted that anxiety does not refer here to the pervasive symptom accompany-
ing neurosis but rather, in a more limited way, to the individual’s discomfort when using
the second language.
3. A complete description of the variables pertaining to each construct is given in the
Method section.

References
Carroll, J. B. and Sapon, S. M. (1959) Modern Language Aptitude Test, Forin A . New
York: The Psychological Corporation.
Clement, R. (1978) Motivational Characteristics of Francophones Learning English.
Quebec City: International Center for Research on Bilingualism, Laval University.
- (1980) Ethnicity, contact and communicative competence in a second language. In H.
Giles, W. P. Robinson and P.Smith (eds), Language: Socialpsychologicalperspectives
(pp. 147-154). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
- (1984) Aspects socio-psychologiques de la communication inter-ethniqueet de I’identitk
culturelle. Recherches Sociologiques, 15,293-312.
Clement, R., Gardner, R. C. and Smythe, P. C. (1977) Motivational variables in second
language acquisition: A study of francophones learning English. Canadian Joicrnal of
Behavioural Science, 9,123-33.
- (1980) Social and individual factors in second language acquisition. CanadianJournalof
Behavioural Science, 12,293-302.
CICment, R. & Kruidenier, B. G. (1983) Orientations in second language acquisition: I.
The effects of ethnicity, milieu, and target language on their emergence. Language
Learning, 33,273-91.
Clement, R., Smythe, P. C. and Gardner, R. C. (1976) Echelles d’attitudes et de motiva-
tions reliees 5 I’apprentissage de I’anglais, langue seconde. CanadianModern Language
Review, 33,5-26.
Colletta, S . P., Clement, R. and Edwards, H. P. (1983) Community andparentaliti~iience:
Effects on student motivation and French second language proficiency. Quebec: Inter-
national Center for Research on Bilingualism, Laval university.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975) Belief, attitude, intention and behavior. Cambridge,
Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Gardner, R. C. (1979) Social psychological aspects of second language acquisition. In H.
Giles and R. St. Clair(eds), LanguageandSocialPsycholugy. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
- (1981) Second language learning. In R. C. Gardner and R. Kalin (eds), A Canadian
socialpsychology of ethnic relations. Toronto: Methuen.
Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009
 SECOND LANGUAGE USAGE 37

- (1983) Learning another language: A true social psychological experiment. Journal of

Language and Social Psychology, 2,219-39.
- (in press) Social psychological aspects of second language learning. London: Edward
Arnold.
Gardner, R. C. and Lalonde, R. N. (1983)The socio-educational model of second language
acquisition: An investigation using LISREL causal modelling. Journalof Language and
Social Psychology, 2,l-IS.
Gardner, R. C. and Smythe, P. C. (1974) Second-Language Acquisition: Motivational
Considerations. In S. T. Carrey (ed.), Bilingualism, biculturalism and education.
Edmonton: The University of Alberta.
- (1975) Second language acquisition: A socialpsycliologicalapproach (Research Bulletin
No. 332). London, Ont.: Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario.
Giles, H. and Byrne, J. L. (1982) An intergroup approach to second language acquisition.
Journal of Multilingual and Multiciiltural Development, 3, 1740.
Hamers, J. F. and Blanc, M. (1983) Bilingualif.4et bilinguisnre. Bruxelles: P. Mardaga.
Institut d e Recherches Psychologiques (1980) Test d’aptitiide aim langues vivantes.
Montrial: Institut de Recherches Psychologiques, inc.
Joreskog, K. G. (1971) Simultaneous factor analysis in several populations. Psychometrika
36,409-26.
Joreskog, K. G. and Sorbom, D. (1981) LISREL V . Chicago: National Educational
Resources.
Krashen, S. D. (1981) Second language acquisition and second language learning. New
York: Pergamon.
Lambert, W. E. (1963) Psychological approaches to the study of language (Part 11): On
second language learning and bilingualism. Modern Language Journal, 14, 114-21.
Lambert, W. E. (1967) A social psychology of bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues, 23,
91-109.
Lomax, R. G. (1982) A guide to JJSREL-type structural equation modeling. Behavioiir
Research Methods and Instrumentation, 14, 1-8.
Munck, I. M. E. (1979) Model building in comparativeeducation. Stockholm: Almquist and
Wiksell.
Pedhazur, E. J. (1982) Miilfipleregression in behavioral research (2nd ed.). Toronto: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.
Rogers, E. M. and Kincaid, D. L. (1981) Communication networks towarda nervparadigm
for research. New York: The Free Press.
Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D. F. and Summers, G . F. (1977) Assessing reliability
and stability in pond models. In D. R. Heise (ed.), Sociological methodology. San
Francisco: Jossey Boss,
Wolfe, L. M. (1981) CaiualmodeLr with unmeasured variables:An introductionto LISREL.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Associa-
tion, Los Angeles, Ca.

Downloaded from http://jls.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OTTAWA LIBRARY on July 21, 2009

View publication stats