Anxiety and Speaking English As A Second Language: RELC Journal December 2006

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/258182758
Anxiety and Speaking English as a Second Language
Article in RELC Journal · December 2006

DOI: 10.1177/0033688206071315
CITATIONS READS
387 26,039
1 author:
Lindy Woodrow
The University of Sydney
36 PUBLICATIONS 1,049 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Lindy Woodrow on 19 November 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

RELC Journal
http://rel.sagepub.com

Lindy Woodrow
RELC Journal 2006; 37; 308
DOI: 10.1177/0033688206071315
The online version of this article can be found at:

http://rel.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/37/3/308
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for RELC Journal can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://rel.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://rel.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

© 2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
Article
Anxiety and Speaking English

as a Second Language
Lindy Woodrow
University of Sydney, Australia
l.woodrow@edfac.usyd.edu.au
Abstract ■ Second language anxiety has a debilitating effect on the oral performance
of speakers of English as a second language. This article describes a research project
concerning the conceptualization of second language speaking anxiety, the relation-
ship between anxiety and second language performance, and the major reported causes
of second language anxiety. The participants in this study were advanced English for
academic purposes (EAP) students studying on intensive EAP courses immediately
prior to entering Australian universities (N = 275). The second language speaking
anxiety scale (SLSAS) was developed for the study. This instrument provided evi-
dence for a dual conceptualization of anxiety reflecting both oral communication
within and outside the language learning classroom. The scale was validated using
confirmatory factor analysis. The analysis indicated second language speaking anxiety
to be a significant predictor of oral achievement. Reported causes of anxiety were
investigated through interviews. The results indicate that the most frequent source of
anxiety was interacting with native speakers. Evidence for two types of anxious
language learner emerged; retrieval interference and skills deficit. There was an
indication from the study that English language learners from Confucian Heritage
Cultures (CHCs), China, Korea and Japan were more anxious language learners than
other ethnic groups.
Keywords ■ Anxiety, confirmatory factor analysis, English for academic purposes,

second language learning, tertiary education.
Introduction
An increasing number of international students study at universities in
Australia. Students from China represent the largest group and numbers
are increasing. Prior to engaging in further studies international students
need to attain a certain level of English proficiency. Many students do this
Vol 37(3) 308-328 | DOI: 10.1177/0033688206071315

© 2006 SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks CA and New Delhi)
http://RELC.sagepub.com

309
by attending intensive English language courses prior to university entry.

Research into factors affecting the successful acquisition of English lan-
guage skills and adaptation to the social and academic environment will
benefit these students.
Anxiety experienced in communication in English can be debilitating
and can influence students’ adaptation to the target environment and ulti-
mately the achievement of their educational goals. Most research in this
area focuses on classroom based anxiety. This research considers second
language anxiety as a two-dimensional construct reflecting communication
within the classroom and outside the classroom in everyday communica-
tive situations.
This study sought to investigate the construct of language learning
anxiety of a sample of students studying English for academic purposes.
The study addresses the conceptualization of anxiety communicating in
English, and the relationship between this anxiety and performance in
English. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to determine the construct
structure and correlational analysis was used to investigate the relationship
between anxiety and oral performance in English. The study assumed lan-
guage learning anxiety to be debilitating and investigated the reported
causes using qualitative methods.
Background
In the past two decades there has been a great deal of research into second
or foreign language anxiety. This research indicates that anxiety has a
debilitating effect on the language learning process. There is evidence
that language learning anxiety differs from other forms of anxiety. Early
research into language learning anxiety used measures of test anxiety from
educational research. However, these studies produced inconsistent results
(Scovel 1978; Young 1991). Further, MacIntyre and Gardner’s research
indicates that language learning anxiety is too specific to be captured by
general anxiety measures (MacIntyre and Gardner 1989, 1991a). A dis-
tinction is made in this study between learning English as a foreign lan-
guage and learning English as a second language. It is argued that living in
an environment where the target language is also the language of everyday
communication may influence anxiety.
In educational research, anxiety is usually classified as being trait or
state. Trait anxiety is a relatively stable personality trait. A person who
is trait anxious is likely to feel anxious in a variety of situations. State
anxiety, on the other hand, is a temporary condition experienced at a par-

310
Regional Language Centre Journal 37.3
ticular moment. A third type of anxiety is situation specific anxiety. This

reflects a trait that recurs in specific situations (Spielberger, Anton and
Bedell 1976). Research into language learning anxiety has indicated that
language learning be classed as situation specific (MacIntyre and Gardner
1991b; Horwitz 2001). That is, a trait which recurs in language learning
situations, namely classrooms.
Anxiety reactions can be categorized as reflecting worry or emotion-
ality (Leibert and Morris 1967). Emotionality refers to physiological
reactions, such as blushing or racing heart, and behavioural reactions, such
as, stammering and fidgeting. Worry refers to cognitive reactions, such as
self-deprecating thoughts or task irrelevant thoughts (Zeidner 1998;
Naveh-Benjamin 1991). Worry is seen as the more debilitating of the two
because it occupies cognitive capacity that otherwise would be devoted to
the task in hand, for example, speaking a foreign language (Tobias 1985).
Two models of anxiety emerged from Tobias’ research: an interference
model of anxiety and an interference retrieval model. An interference
retrieval model relates to anxiety as inhibiting the recall of previously
learned material at the output stage, whereas a skills deficit model relates
to problems at the input and processing stages of learning, as a result of
poor study habits, or a lack of skills. This results in anxiety at the output
stage due to the realization of this lack of knowledge. Recent research in
language learning has provided some support for this theory (MacIntyre
and Gardner 1994; Onwuegbuzie, Bailey and Daley 2000).
Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope (1986) made a valuable contribution to
theorizing and measurement in language learning anxiety. They consid-
ered anxiety as comprising three components: communication apprehen-
sion, test anxiety and fear of negative evaluation. Horwitz and colleagues
viewed the construct of foreign language anxiety as more than a sum of its
parts and define foreign language anxiety as ‘a distinct complex of self-
perceptions, beliefs, feelings and behaviors related to classroom learning
arising from the uniqueness of the language learning process’ (Horwitz,
Horwitz and Cope 1986; Horwitz 1986). Emerging from this research was
the thirty-three item Foreign Language Anxiety Scale (FLCAS). This scale
has been used in a large number of research projects (Horwitz 2001). The
scale has been found to be reliable and valid (Aida 1994; Cheng, Horwitz
and Schallert 1999).
Most language learning anxiety research has focused on a one dimen-
sional domain anxiety. This conceptualization reflects the anxiety that
occurs in classroom settings (Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope 1986; Aida 1994;

311
Phillips 1992). The orientation of this conceptualization rests with the

linguistic setting of the students learning the language. A lot of research
into language learning anxiety is based in the United States where foreign
language courses are a requirement of undergraduate degree programs.
This is a foreign language situation where most of the communication in
the target language takes place in the classroom. Other research focuses on
learning English in a non-English speaking country. In a second language
situation, such as Australia, where the target language is also the main lan-
guage of communication outside of the classroom, it was felt that the
conceptualization should be expanded to reflect potential situations beyond
the classroom that could trigger language anxiety. It is possible that class-
room communication could be considered less anxiety provoking than
many communicative events faced in everyday life by students living in a
second language environment.
Instrumentation to measure foreign language anxiety typically uses
Likert type scales to measure responses to stressors. Horwitz’s FLCAS
includes items relating to communication apprehension, for example, ‘I
tremble when I know that I’m going to be called on in the language class’;
test anxiety, for example, ‘I am usually at ease during tests in my lan-
guage class’; and fear of negative evaluation, for example, ‘I get nervous
when the language teacher asks questions which I haven’t prepared in
advance’. In the original published study empirical evidence for classi-
fication was not presented. However, in a factor analytical study of FCLAS
used with students learning Japanese, Aida (1994) produced a four-factor
model: factor one reflected speech anxiety, fear of failing, comfortableness
in speaking with native Japanese, and negative attitudes toward the Japa-
nese class. MacIntyre and Gardner’s (1994) instrument focused on the
stages of foreign language anxiety, that is: input, processing and output
stages. An example of an item in the input anxiety scale is ‘I get flustered
unless French/Spanish/German/Japanese is spoken very slowly’; an exam-
ple from the processing stage is: ‘I feel anxious if the French/Spanish/
German/Japanese class seems disorganized’; an example of the output
stage is ‘I may know the proper French/Spanish/German/ Japanese
expression but when I am nervous it just won’t come out’. It is interesting
to note that most of the items used to measure language anxiety include
anxiety reactions, for example, ‘I tremble’ or ‘I get flustered’. Thus, add-
ing the dimension of worry and emotionality to the scales although this is
not exploited or discussed in any detail in any of the foreign language
anxiety studies.

312
The major significance of research into foreign/second language anxi-

ety is in the relationship between anxiety and performance in the foreign
language. Numerous studies have found that this anxiety is negatively
related to language performance with some researchers claiming it is one
of the strongest predictors of foreign language success (MacIntyre 1999).
Table 1 summarizes the findings of some of the correlational studies
involving foreign/second language anxiety.
Table 1. Relationship between Foreign Language Anxiety and Performance Variables
Researcher Measure
Performance Correlation
Horwitz (1986) FLCAS Final course grade r = -.54, p = <.001
Aida (1994) FLCAS Course grade r = -.38, p = <.01
Phillips (1992) FLCAS Oral test grade r = -.40, p = <.01
Cheng (1999) FLCAS Speaking course r = -.28, p = <.001
grade
Saito and Samimy Language class Final course grade r =.-51 - -.52, p = <.01
(1996) anxiety
MacIntyre and French class Vocabulary test r = .-31 - -.42, p = <.001
Gardner (1989) anxiety
French use r = .-32 - -.50
anxiety
Much focus has been on the relationship between the skill of speaking in a
foreign/second language and anxiety (Lucas 1984; Phillips 1992; Price
1991). Although recent research explores other language skills, for exam-
ple, writing (Cheng, Horwitz and Schallert 1999); reading (Saito, Horwitz
and Garza 1999); and listening (Kim 2000). For a review of foreign lan-
guage anxiety and achievement see Horwitz (2001).
The Study
The present study aims to shed light on second language speaking anxi-
ety as experienced by English learners studying in Australia. The study
proposes a dual conceptualization of second language speaking anxiety
reflecting the distinction between classroom communication and com-
munication outside of class. Data were collected using a questionnaire
developed for this purpose. The relationship between second language
anxiety and speaking performance was examined and the major causes of
anxiety are considered. The study set out to answer the following research
questions:

313
1. Is a dual conceptualization of second language anxiety according

to in-class and out-of-class communication supported?
2. Is the instrumentation to measure second language anxiety reli-
able and valid?
3. Is there a relationship between speaking performance and second
language speaking anxiety?
4. What are the major stressors reported by students learning English
in Australia?
Participants
The participants for this study were all in their final months of studying
English immediately prior to enrolling on university courses in Australia
(N = 275, 50.5% male, n = 139; 49.5% female, n = 136). They attended
English for Academic Purposes (EAP) courses at accredited intensive
language centres in Australia. The majority of students were from Asian
countries (83.2%, n = 229) with students from China representing the larg-
est group in the sample (34%, n = 92).
At the time of the data collection most of the students still needed to
take a language test to determine adequate English proficiency for univer-
sity entry. The most widely used test for university entry in Australia is the
International English Language Testing Service (IELTS) test.
Methodology
The study involved three sources of data; quantitative data from the Sec-
ond Language Anxiety Speaking Scale, IELTS type oral assessment and
qualitative data from the interview data.
The existing instrumentation used to measure language learning anxi-
ety was not considered appropriate because it did not reflect the second
language environment of the sample, so the second language speak-
ing anxiety scale (SLSAS) was constructed. The instrument was piloted
and refined based on empirical and theoretical justifications (Woodrow
2003).
The questionnaire consists of twelve items on a five-point Likert type
scale. The items reflected the communicative situations the participants
were likely to encounter according to the communicative setting, inter-
locutor (speaker/listener) variables and the nature of the communication.
The communicative setting items concerned the in-class/out-of-class dis-
tinction. The interlocutor variables referred to the number of speakers, the

314
status of the speakers and whether the speaker was a native or non-native
speaker of English. The items for out-of-class communication took into
consideration the communication between the participant and his/her future
academic lecturer. Most of the sample were enrolling on graduate courses
at university and needed to talk to Faculty about this. These items are dif-
ferent from the linguistic communication within the English language
classroom itself. The nature of communication reflected initiating and
responding in oral interaction. The items were measured by the extent to
which the participants agreed or disagreed with the statements.
The performance variable was measured using an IELTS type oral
assessment. This assessment took approximately ten minutes and con-
sisted of three stages: introduction and general interview, individual
long turn and two way discussion. The first stage generally probed the
student’s ability, the second stage involved the student giving a short
monologue and the third stage pushed the student to his/her linguistic
ceiling. The participants were assessed according to descriptors based
on fluency, language usage and pronunciation. The students were given
grades ranging from A–F with an F signifying the student was unlikely
to be accepted onto a university course based on English language
proficiency.
Forty-seven participants took part in an interview with the researcher.
The interview participants were selected based on class groupings, ethnic-
ity, gender and perception of anxiety so that a representative sample of
participants could be surveyed. The participants took part in a semi-
structured interview concerning their experiences of second language
speaking anxiety. The interviews were used to triangulate the data and to
provide further insights into perceived stressors in speaking English in a
second language environment. The participants were asked about whether
they experienced second language speaking anxiety, in what situations
they felt anxious, and how they felt. These interviews were audio recorded
and transcribed.
Results
The results indicated support for a dual conceptualization of second lan-
guage anxiety and the questionnaire was found to be reliable and valid. A
significant negative relationship was found between second language
speaking anxiety and oral performance. The major stressor identified by
the participants was interacting with native speakers.

315
To assess whether an in-class and out-of-class distinction of second

language anxiety was appropriate and to assess the validity and reliability
of the questionnaire, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using LISREL
was computed. CFA was chosen to confirm hypothesized latent variables
made a-priori. The assumptions of CFA concern sample size and multi-
variate normality. CFA is a technique classed as structural equation mod-
eling (SEM). SEM is less reliable with small samples and Chi Square (χ2)
tests of data fit are sensitive to sample size. According to Boomsa (1983,
cited in Tabachnick and Fidell 1996: 715) a sample size of two hundred is
adequate for small and medium sized models. Therefore, the sample size
in this study was adequate.
Multivariate outliers were removed from the data using the malanho-
bis statistic using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) com-
puter software. Critical values of χ2 were assessed at p = <.001. No cases
exceeded this level in the sub-scales.
The CFA model used a correlation rather than covariance matrix be-
cause the items were from a five-point Likert scale, and therefore, the
variables could not be classed as truly continuous.
A two factor model best fitted the data with the observed variables
loading on latent variables of in-class anxiety and out-of-class anxiety.
Although the two latent variables were highly correlated a two factor
model provided a better fit to the data than a one factor model. The model
is presented in Figure 1. Item seven of the SLSAS referring to commu-
nication with administrative staff in the language centre seemed ambigu-
ous. It could be classified as both in-class and out-of-class anxiety, so the
item was removed from the analysis. There was an indication of a correla-
tion between variables relating to native speaker interaction, so an error
covariance was included between these. A further error covariance was
included which seemed to reflect public performance: answering a ques-
tion from the teacher and giving an oral presentation. To evaluate the
model, multiple fit indices were used. The model fit indices are shown in
Table 2. The model provided a moderate fit to the data with the goodness
of fit index (GFI) at .90, the comparative fit index at .93 and the non-
normed fit index at .90 (Holmes and Smith 2000). This indicates that the
conceptualization of second language speaking anxiety according to in-
and out-of-class communication is relevant to language learners in an ESL
environment.

316
Figure 1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Second Language Speaking Anxiety
χ2 p χ2/df RMR RMSEA GFI AGFI CFI NFI NNFI

172.62 .00 4.32 .07 .11 .90 .83 .93 .84 .90
Table 2. Fit Indices for Two Factor Confirmatory Factor

Analysis of Second Language Speaking Anxiety
Chi-square (χ2)
Probability (p)
Degrees of freedom (df)
Root mean square residual (RMR)
Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)
Goodness of fit index (GFI)
Adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI)
Comparative Fit Index (CFI)
Normed fit index (NFI)
Non-normed fit index (NNFI)
Reliability for the SLAS was calculated based on the CFA model. This
method is considered superior to the traditional alpha (α) coefficient since

317
error variance is accounted for. Reliability for in-class anxiety was .89 and
for out-of-class .87 and for the combined scales .94. These indices indicate
that the SLSAS is a reliable instrument.
To assess the relationship between second language speaking anxiety
and oral performance, correlations were computed using the Pearson
correlation coefficient in SPSS. The results indicated that there were
significant negative correlations between both in-class and out-of-class
anxiety and oral performance (in-class anxiety and oral performance:
r = -.23, p = <.01; out-of-class anxiety and oral performance: r = -.24,
p = <.01). The correlation between in-class and out-of-class anxiety was:
r = .58, p = <.01. These results are presented in Table 4. The correlations
indicate that both types of anxiety are related to performance almost
equally. However, the correlation between in-class and out-of-class anxi-
ety is not high enough to suggest they are the same, thus, supporting the
findings of the CFA. The descriptive statistics for the questionnaire data
are presented in Table 3 and the results for individual anxiety variables
and oral performance are presented in Table 5. These results indicate that
participants found communicating with the teacher and performing in
front of the class to be most stressful.
Table 3. Means and Standard Deviations for

Second Language Speaking Anxiety Scale
Variable M SD
In-class anxiety
Giving oral presentation 2.93 1.09
Role-play in front of class 2.73 1.02
Contribute formal discussion 2.61 1.99
Answer question teacher 2.05 1.93
Speak informally teacher 1.81 1.82
Take part group discussion 1.74 1.87
Out-of-class anxiety
Answer question lecturer 2.65 1.02
Ask question lecturer 2.35 1.02
Take part in conversation with 2.35 1.03
more than one NS
Answer questions NS 2.23 1.01
Start conversation NS 1.93 1.96

318
Table 4. Correlations between Anxiety Sub-scales and Oral Performance
Anxiety in-class Anxiety out-of-class Oral performance

Anxiety in-class 1.00
Anxiety out-of-class 1.58 1.00
Oral performance -.23 -.24 100
Correlations significant at p = <.01
Table 5. Correlations between Second Language

Speaking Variables and Oral Performance
Anxiety variable Oral performance

Answer teacher r = -.23, p = <01
Informal teacher r = -.24, p = <01
Group discussion r = -.15, p = <05
Role-play r = -.26, p = <01
Oral presentation r = -.06, ns
Formal discussion r = -.12, p = <05
More than 1 NS r = -.17, p = <01
Start conversation NS r = -.18, p = <01
Answer subject lecturer r = -.21, p = <01
Ask subject lecturer r = -.19, p = <01
Answer NS r = -.21, p = <01
A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted to exam-

ine the influence of ethnicity and sex on anxiety. This indicated a sig-
nificant effect for ethnic group: V = 015, F(18,492) = 2.28 p<0.01. There
was no significant effect for sex: V = .005, F(2,245) = .64 p =.53.
Further univariate analyses of variance (ANOVAS) indicated sig-
nificant main effects of ethnic group on in class anxiety: F(9, 246) = 2.69,
p<.01, η2 = .09 and on out-of- class anxiety: F(9, 246) = 3.45, p<.00001,
η2 = .11.
Using a significance level of .05 Tukey’s HSD post hoc tests indicated
significant differences between European and Korean participants on in
class anxiety and Vietnamese and Korean, Vietnamese and Japanese and
Vietnamese and Taiwanese on out-of-class anxiety. This indicates some
evidence for a distinction between CHCs and other cultures.
To assess the major stressors, interview data were used. The interviews
were audio recorded and transcribed. The interview data were coded
according to categories relating to stressors, reactions and coping strate-
gies. The data revealed that of the forty-seven coded interviews, forty

319
(85%) of the participants claimed to experience second language speaking

anxiety to some extent.
The major stressors reported by the respondents were ‘performing in
front of class’ and ‘talking to native speakers’. Table 6 shows the fre-
quencies of the stressors reported by the interviewees.
Table 6. Reported Stressors Based on Interview Data when Speaking in English
Stressor N %
Performing in English in front of classmates 21 44.7
Giving an oral presentation 20 42.7
Speaking in English to native speakers 18 42.7
Speaking in English in classroom activities 19 19.1
Speaking in English to strangers 19 19.1
Not being able to understand when spoken to 18 17.0
Talking about an unfamiliar topic 18 17.0
Talking to someone of higher status 18 17.0
Speaking in test situations 17 14.9
When interlocutor seems stern 16 12.7
Not being able to make self understood 15 10.6
Information regarding anxiety reactions revealed that more respondents

reported physiological (n = 24, 51.1%) and cognitive reactions (n = 23,
48.9%) than behavioural (n = 16, 34%) reactions. Physiological reactions
included sweating, racing heart and blushing and cognitive reactions
included worrying about performance and mind going blank. Behavioural
reactions included fidgeting, talking too much and stuttering.
Emerging from the data, approximately half of the respondents referred
to methods they used to cope with second language speaking anxiety.
Perseverance and developing skills were the most frequently mentioned
coping strategies. Table 7 summarizes some of these responses.
Table 7. Reported Methods of Coping with Second

Language Speaking Anxiety (N = 24)
Coping strategy n %
Perseverance 8 33.3
Improving language /knowledge skills 7 29.2
Positive thinking 4 16.7
Compensation 4 16.7
Relaxation techniques 3 12.5

320
‘Perseverance’ refers to not giving up when speaking while ‘improving

language’ refers to preparing utterances and studying to improve speak-
ing. ‘Positive thinking’ included positive self-talk while ‘compensation
strategies’ included smiling and volunteering comments. Various relaxa-
tion techniques were mentioned, such as deep breathing and conscious
efforts to calm oneself.
Discussion
The first research question refers to the relevance of a dual conceptualiza-
tion of second language speaking anxiety. The results indicate that this is
a useful distinction to make with learners in a second language learning
environment where a great deal of communication in the second language
occurs outside of the classroom. The indicated that while in-class and out-
of-class anxiety are highly correlated (r = .58, p = <.01), they are not the
same construct. The qualitative data also provided support for an in-class
and out-of-class distinction. Some participants reported experiencing out-
of-class anxiety. Michael reported:
I always feel a little anxious when I speak with native speakers and not
inside class but outside class. Because when I speak in class I pay
money for it. I am afraid of nothing. But when I speak in the street
sometimes…especially when maybe young Australians.
This is an interesting viewpoint, the language class here is viewed as a

product.
Harry also reported feeling anxious when speaking in English out-of-
class:
I feel anxiety when I talk with native English speakers because I know
my English…my speaking English…is not correct, so maybe it makes
the native English speakers confused and maybe sometimes what I’m
speaking…what I’m talking about is not interesting to native speakers. I
think so these kinds of things.
Harry is concerned with whether the listener can understand.

In contrast some participants referred to in-class anxiety. Phillip states;
When I stand in front of classmates and students and make a presenta-
tion I will feel anxious because I lack practice of speaking.
Whereas Lesley states:

When I speak to my teacher and ask some question to my teacher I
usually feel very anxious. And when I say to the in front of the English

321
class and speak some question some topic I usually very anxious. I can’t
remember anything I just maybe ah… ah… ah.
Whilst the types of anxious learners were not the direct focus of the
research evidence to support a distinction between these types of anxiety
emerged from the interview data. From the above responses it seems that
Philip feels his anxiety is due to lack of practice thus relating to a skills
deficit type of anxiety. Lesley, on the other hand seems to be experiencing
information retrieval anxiety, that is, anxiety is preventing the recall of
previously learned material when she cannot remember anything.
The second research question considers the reliability and validity of
the instrumentation. A new instrument was developed to measure anxiety
in a second language environment—the second language speaking anxiety
scale (SLSAS).The instrumentation achieved validity through providing a
reasonable fit to the CFA model. Reliability was established using a
coefficient based on the model that took error into account.
The third research question concerns the relationship between second
language speaking anxiety and oral performance in the second language
using an IELTS type oral assessment. The correlational analysis indi-
cated a negative relationship between both in-class anxiety and out-of-
class anxiety and oral performance. Providing evidence that anxiety can
adversely affect oral communication for students speaking English. These
results replicate the findings of other researchers in the area (see Table 1).
The negative correlation between oral performance and anxiety is not very
strong. This is understandable because anxiety is just one of a number of
variables influencing successful communication. However, this research
indicates that anxiety does influence oral communication. In a larger re-
search project into variables of adaptive learning comprising affect,
motivation and learning strategies anxiety was found to be an important
part of the model (Woodrow 2003).
The fourth research question concerns the stressors reported by the sam-
ple. According to the quantitative data, giving oral presentations was rated
the highest and taking part in group discussions was rated the lowest.
Whilst the cohort as a whole did not demonstrate very high speaking
anxiety there was evidence of variation between nationality groups with
European and Vietmanese participants tending to be less anxious and
Japanese, Korean and Chinese participants tending to be more anxious.
Most previous research into anxiety is situated in a western setting, how-
ever, there are many examples of differences between Confucian heritage
learners and western learners in academic contexts (Watkins and Biggs

322
1996, 2001). Research has indicated a relationship between reticence in

classrooms of Chinese learners and Confucian values of ‘face’ and value
being place on ‘silence’ (Liu 2002). Current research has indicated culture
may also be manifested in students’ willingness to communicate (WTC)
(Wen and Clement 2003; Yashima 2002). Anxiety is hypothesized as one
of the antecendents of WTC (MacIntyre, Baker, Clément and Conrod
2001). There is a need for further research in this area.
The qualitative data indicated that giving oral presentations and per-
forming in front of classmates were the most reported stressors for in-class
situations. However, the correlational data indicated that ‘giving an oral
presentation’ was the only anxiety variable that was not significantly cor-
related with oral performance. This would be an interesting avenue for
further research. One possible explanation for this discrepancy is that the
oral assessment task in the research involved the participants producing a
‘long turn’ whereby the student was required to speak for one to two
minutes on a topic rather than a formal presentation. In addition, the oral
assessment involved one to one communication rather than one to an audi-
ence. Such long turns frequently occur in normal communication, whereas
giving an oral presentation rarely occurs in everyday communication.
Thus, giving an oral presentation calls upon different communicative skills
than were measured in the oral assessment. The most highly correlated
variables reflected interaction. The correlations between the observed vari-
ables and oral performance are presented in Table 6.
Interestingly, nearly all of the interview participants reported experi-
encing some anxiety when speaking in English. ‘Communicating with
native speakers’ was the most referred to out-of-class stressor. However,
the level of predictability is also a consideration. Miko reported that she
felt most anxious with native speakers, but not in situations where there is
a high degree of linguistic predictability. In answer to a question about the
situations in which she felt most anxious she answered:
…of course to speak to native speaker and which is not my teacher or
some people I know, which is stranger. But I am not afraid to speak to
the storekeeper or something. I can speak to them. Just people on the
street or on the train, I am afraid of speaking to them because I worry
about my grammar mistakes basically.
Some participants referred to the number of native speakers involved in

the interaction:
Lu responded to the same question about the situations in which she
felt most anxious:

323
Talk with more than one native speaker. Because when I talk with one
person we can communicate effectively and there is only one listener,
one audience. But more than one person maybe I will think someone
maybe do not agree with me and maybe we will argue. Just a feel-
ing…just a feeling.
The study indicated that the participants attributed anxiety to a range of

factors, but particularly referred to communication with native speakers.
Interaction with non-native speakers was not considered a stressor by most
of the sample. In a similar vein, the study also indicated low anxiety for
group discussions. This lends support to using collaborative techniques
that focus on student–student interaction.
Some participants talked about some of the ways they dealt with their
speaking anxiety. Some students referred to perseverance. For example
Hero said:
I think to try speaking again and again is the best way to solve it
(anxiety). Keep or let my mind to calm down, be natural and like
speaking to Japanese people.
In addition to perseverance this student tries to use relaxation tech-

niques to deal with his anxiety. This is a recommended strategy for deal-
ing with anxiety. Skills deficit anxious individuals benefit from improving
learning strategies and focusing on learning the necessary skills and lin-
guistic features of the language whereas interference retrieval anxious
individuals can focus on relaxation techniques and positive self-talk
(Young 1991; Zeidner 1998).
Conclusions
This study found that a dual conceptualization of second language speak-
ing anxiety as measured by the second language speaking anxiety scale
was relevant to students studying English in Australia. The results indicate
that the instrument is reliable and valid and thus provides researchers with
a new instrument to measure second language speaking. It would be inter-
esting to use this with second language speakers of a lower linguistic level
and also with students after they have started their university courses to
investigate contextual influences on second language speaking anxiety.
Anxiety is clearly an issue in language learning and has a debilitating
effect on speaking English for some students. So it is important that teach-
ers are sensitive to this in classroom interactions and provide help to
minimize second language anxiety.

324
The study also provided support for the notion of stages of anxiety.
Thus, a student may experience anxiety due to skills deficit or retrieval
interference. This has implications at a classroom level. A skills deficit
anxious student would benefit from instruction in language learning strate-
gies and scaffolding of skills whereas a retrieval interference anxious
student would benefit from de-sensitization and relaxation techniques. It is
important to take into consideration communication both in and outside
the classroom and ensure that students have the necessary skills and prac-
tice for everyday communication. This could be achieved by setting out-
of-class tasks utilizing the rich linguistic resources available to learners.
For example, students could join a local library and participate in local
community activities as well as participating in the university community.
Finally, there is a need for empirical evidence concerning how effective
anxiety reducing techniques are in second language learning classrooms.
REFERENCES
Aida, Y.
1994 ‘Examination of Horwitz and Cope’s Construct of Foreign Language Anxiety:
The Case of Students of Japanese’, Modern Language Journal 78(2): 155-67.
Chastain, K.
1975 ‘Affective and Ability Factors in Second Language Acquisition’, Language
Learning 25: 153-61.
Cheng, Y.S., E.K. Horwitz and D.L. Schallert
1999 ‘Language Anxiety: Differentiating Writing and Speaking Components’,
Language Learning 49: 417-46.
Gardner, R.C., and P.D. MacIntyre
1993 ‘A Student’s Contribution to Second Language Learning, Part II: Affective
Variables’, Language Teaching 26: 1-11.
Gardner, R.C., P. Smythe, R. Clement and L. Gliksman
1976 ‘Second Language Learning: A Social Psychological Perspective’, Canadian
Modern Language Review 32: 198-213.
Holmes-Smith, P.
2000 Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling Using LISREL (School Re-
search, Evaluation and Measurement Services).
Horwitz, E.K.
1986 'Preliminary Evidence for the Reliability and Validity of a Foreign Language
Anxiety Scale', in E.K. Horwitz and D.J. Young (eds.), Language Anxiety:
From Theory to Research to Classroom Practices (New York: Prentice Hall).
2001 ‘Language Anxiety and Achievement’, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics
21: 112-26.
Horwitz, E.K., M.E. Horwitz and J. Cope
1986 ‘Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety’, Modern Language Journal 70: 125-
32.

325
Jöreskog, K.G., and D. Sorbom

1996 LISREL 8: User’s Reference Guide (Chicago: Scientific Software Interna-
tional).
Kim, J.H.
2000 'Foreign Language Listening Anxiety: A Study of Korean Students Learning
English' (Unpublished thesis, University of Texas, Austin).
Kleinmann, H.H.
1977 ‘Avoidance Behavior in Adult Second Language Acquisition’, Language
Learning 27(1): 93-107.
Liebert, R.M., and L.W. Morris
1967 ‘Cognitive and Emotional Components of Anxiety: A Distinction and Some
Initial Data’, Psychological Reports 20: 975-78.
Liu, J.
2002 ‘Negotiating Silence in American Classrooms: Three Chinese Cases’, Lan-
guage and Intercultural Communication 2(1): 37-54.
Lucas, J.
1994 ‘Communication Apprehension in the ESL Classroom: Getting our Students
to Talk’, Foreign Language Annals 17: 593-98.
MacIntyre, P.D.
1999 ‘Language Anxiety: A Review of the Research for Language Teachers’, In
D.J. Young (ed.), Affect in Foreign Language and Second Language Learn-
ing: A Practical Guide to Creating a Low-anxiety Classroom Atmosphere
(Boston: McGraw-Hill College): 24-45.
MacIntyre, P.D., and R.C. Gardner
1989 ‘Anxiety and Language Learning: Towards a Theoretical Clarification’, Lan-
guage Learning 39: 251-75.
1991a ‘Language Anxiety: Its Relationship to Other Anxieties and to Processing in
Native and Second Languages’, Language Learning 41: 85-117.
1991b ‘Methods and Results in the Study of Anxiety and Language Learning: A
Review of the Literature’, Language Learning 41: 513-34.
1994 ‘The Subtle Effects of Anxiety on Cognitive Processing in the Second Lan-
guage’, Language Learning 44(2): 283-305.
MacIntyre, P.D., S.C. Baker, R. Clément and S. Conrod
2001 'Willingness to Communicate, Social, Support and Language Learning Orien-
tations of Immersion Students’, Studies in Second Language Acquisition 23:
369-88.
Naveh-Benjamin, M.
1991 ‘A Comparison of Training Programs Intended for Different Types of Test
Anxious Students: Further Support for an Information-processing Model’,
Journal of Educational Psychology 83(1): 134-39.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., P. Bailey and C.E. Daley
2000 ‘The Validation of Three Scales Measuring Anxiety at Different Stages of the
Foreign Language Learning Process: Input Anxiety Scale, Processing Anxiety
Scale, Output Anxiety Scale’, Language Learning 50(1): 87-117.
Phillips, E.
1992 ‘The Effects of Language Anxiety on Student Test Oral Performance’, The
Modern Language Journal 76: 14-26.

326
Price, M.L.
1991 ‘The Subjective Experience of Foreign Language Anxiety: Interviews with
Highly Anxious Students’, in E.K. Horwitz and D.J. Young (eds.), Foreign
Language Anxiety: From Theory to Research to Classroom Practices (Engle-
wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall).
Saito, Y., E.K. Horwitz and T.J. Garza
1999 ‘Foreign Language Reading Anxiety’, Modern Language Journal 83: 202-18.
Scovel, T.
1978 ‘The Effect of Affect on Foreign Language Learning: A Review of the
Anxiety Research’, Language Learning 28(1): 129-41.
Spielberger, C., W. Anton and J. Bedell
1976 ‘The Nature and Treatment of Test Anxiety’, in M. Zuckerman and C. Spiel-
berger, Emotions and Anxiety: New Concepts, Methods and Applications
(Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum): 317-44
Tabachnick, B.G., and L.S. Fidell
1996 Using Multivariate Statistics (California State University: Harper Collins
College Publishers).
Tobias, S.
1985 ‘Test Anxiety: Interference, Defective Skills and Cognitive Capacity’, Educa-
tional Psychologist 3: 135-42.
Watkins, D.A. and J.B. Biggs
1996 The Chinese Learner: Cultural, Psychological and Contextual Influences
(Hong Kong and Melbourne: CERC and ACER).
2001 Teaching the Chinese Learner: Psychological and Pedagogical Influences
(Hong Kong and Melbourne: CERC and ACER).
Wen, W.P., and R. Clément
2003 ‘A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL’,
Language, Culture and Curriculum 16: 18-38.
Woodrow, L.J.
2001 Towards a Model of Adaptive Language Learning: A Pilot Study (ERIC
Documents, ED456645).
2003 ‘A Model of Adaptive Learning of International English for Academic
Purposes (EAP) at Australian Universities’ (Unpublished doctoral thesis,
University of Sydney).
Yashima, T.
2002 ‘Willingness to Communicate in a Second Language: The Japanese EFL
Context’, The Modern Language Journal 86: 54-66.
Young, D.J.
1991 ‘Creating a Low Anxiety Classroom Environment: What Does Anxiety
Research Suggest?’, Modern Language Journal 75: 426-38.
Zeidner, M.
1998 Test Anxiety: The State of the Art (New York: Plenum Press).

327
APPENDIX
Instrument Used in Main Study
In the column Anxiety fill in the circles according to how anxious you feel when you
speak English in the following situations.
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Slightly Moderately Very Extremely
anxious anxious anxious anxious anxious
Situation Anxiety
1. The teacher asks me a question in English in class. |||||
1 2 3 4 5
2. Speaking informally to my English teacher out of class. |||||
1 2 3 4 5
3. Taking part in a group discussion in class. |||||
1 2 3 4 5
4. Taking part in a role-play or dialogue in front of my class. |||||
1 2 3 4 5
5. Giving an oral presentation to the rest of the class. |||||
1 2 3 4 5
6. When asked to contribute to a formal discussion in class. |||||
1 2 3 4 5
7. Talking to administrative staff of my language school in |||||
English. 1 2 3 4 5
8. Taking part in a conversation out of class with more than |||||
one native speaker of English. 1 2 3 4 5
9. Starting a conversation out of class with a friend or |||||
colleague who is a native speaker of English. 1 2 3 4 5
10. A lecturer/supervisor in my intended university faculty of |||||
study asks me a question in English. 1 2 3 4 5
11. Asking for advice in English from a lecturer/supervisor in |||||
my intended university faculty of study. 1 2 3 4 5
12 A native speaker I do not know asks me questions. |||||
1 2 3 4 5

328
Correlation Matrix for Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Anxiety
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1 1.00
2 1.66 1.00
3 1.67 1.53 1.00
4 1.56 1.47 1.53 1.00
5 1.50 1.43 1.48 1.70 1.00
6 1.61 1.49 1.56 1.59 1.58 1.00
7 1.37 1.54 1.36 1.30 1.32 1.39 1.00
8 1.35 1.52 1.42 1.29 1.28 1.37 11.85 1.00
9 1.55 1.49 1.40 1.44 1.42 1.44 11.54 1.52 1.00
10 1.45 1.51 1.38 1.38 1.33 11.39 .54 1.52 1.81 1.00
11 1.37 1.43 1.32 1.35 1.28 11.33 1.60 1.60 1.57 1.58 1.00
Key to variables
1 in-class anxiety Answer question teacher
2 in-class anxiety Speak informally to my teacher
3 in-class anxiety Take part in group discussions
4 in-class anxiety Take part in a role-play
5 in-class anxiety Give an oral presentation
6 in-class anxiety Contribute to formal discussions
7 out-of-class anxiety Take part conversation more than one native speaker
8 out-of-class anxiety Start conversation with native speaker
9 out-of –class anxiety Answer question from lecturer
10 out-of-class anxiety Ask lecturer for advice
11 out-of class anxiety Answer question unknown native speaker

View publication stats

Anxiety and Speaking English As A Second Language: RELC Journal December 2006

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Anxiety and Speaking English As A Second Language: RELC Journal December 2006

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

Anxiety and Speaking English as a Second Language

Article in RELC Journal · December 2006

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Anxiety and Speaking English as a Second Language

The online version of this article can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://rel.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Anxiety and Speaking English

Keywords ■ Anxiety, confirmatory factor analysis, English for academic purposes,

Vol 37(3) 308-328 | DOI: 10.1177/0033688206071315

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

by attending intensive English language courses prior to university entry.

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

ticular moment. A third type of anxiety is situation specific anxiety. This

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Phillips 1992). The orientation of this conceptualization rests with the

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

The major significance of research into foreign/second language anxi-

Table 1. Relationship between Foreign Language Anxiety and Performance Variables

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

1. Is a dual conceptualization of second language anxiety according

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

To assess whether an in-class and out-of-class distinction of second

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Figure 1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Second Language Speaking Anxiety

χ2 p χ2/df RMR RMSEA GFI AGFI CFI NFI NNFI

Table 2. Fit Indices for Two Factor Confirmatory Factor

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Table 3. Means and Standard Deviations for

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Table 4. Correlations between Anxiety Sub-scales and Oral Performance

Anxiety in-class Anxiety out-of-class Oral performance

Table 5. Correlations between Second Language

Anxiety variable Oral performance

A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted to exam-

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

(85%) of the participants claimed to experience second language speaking

Table 6. Reported Stressors Based on Interview Data when Speaking in English

Information regarding anxiety reactions revealed that more respondents

Table 7. Reported Methods of Coping with Second

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

‘Perseverance’ refers to not giving up when speaking while ‘improving

This is an interesting viewpoint, the language class here is viewed as a

Harry is concerned with whether the listener can understand.

Whereas Lesley states:

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

1996, 2001). Research has indicated a relationship between reticence in

Some participants referred to the number of native speakers involved in

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

The study indicated that the participants attributed anxiety to a range of

In addition to perseverance this student tries to use relaxation tech-

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Jöreskog, K.G., and D. Sorbom

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

Correlation Matrix for Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Anxiety

Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on April 16, 2008

View publication stats