Group 09

ENG101 - Dd
BA ELS - 1

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION:

APTITUDE, MOTIVATION, AND AFFECT
Individual Differences
(By: Ayessah Nesreen B. Pasagi)
According to Dörnyei, these individual differences are “enduring personal characteristics
that are assumed to apply to everybody and on which people differ by degree.”
Humans differ from each other due to many biological or conditioned factors (affected by
nature) or unconscious forces (affected by past experiences). The many ways in which one learns
about these differences are usually similar, through introspection and interaction with other people,
or by reading books and watching television or cinema. Across various studies, there are most
commonly investigated differences that researchers attempt to analyze. These differences that are
most commonly encountered in studies are:
➢ Age
➢ Sex
➢ Aptitude
➢ Motivation
➢ Learning Styles
➢ Learning Strategies
➢ Personality
Aptitude
(By: Ayessah Nesreen B. Pasagi)
According to Dr. John Carroll, language aptitude is “simply an ability or knack for learning
foreign languages. Virtually everyone has this ability, but some people appear to learn at a faster
rate than others.”
Dr. Carroll, an internationally acclaimed psychometrician and educational psychologist,
conducted research in the 1950s to investigate the concept of language aptitude and how it could
be measured. During those times, Dr. Carroll identified four distinct abilities that factored into
language aptitude, separate from motivation and verbal intelligence. He and Sapon designed the
Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) based on Carroll’s four-part model of language aptitude.
Carroll’s Four Components of Language Aptitude
➢ Phonemic coding ability is the capacity to process auditory input into segments
which can be stored and retrieved. It is particularly important at very early stages
of learning when this ability “is concerned with the extent to which the input that
negatively impacts the learner can become input that is worth processing, as
opposed to input which may simply be an auditory blur or only partially processed”.
In other words, if the learner cannot analyze the incoming stream of speech into
phonemes to recognize morphemes, input may not result in intake. In simpler
words, this refers to the ability to perceive and remember distinct sounds and their
associated symbols.
 Example:
Cat /kæt/
Nap /næp/
House /haʊs/

➢ Grammatical sensitivity is the ability to recognize the function of a lexical

element in a sentence. It is an important component of language aptitude defined as
"the ability to recognize the grammatical functions of words (or other linguistic
entities) within sentences". It does not deal with explicit grammar knowledge but
with awareness of syntactic patterns.

Example:
The cat naps every day.
noun verb
I have been sitting all day.
Noun phrase Verb phrase (predicate)
(subject)

➢ Inductive learning ability is the ability to infer or induce rules governing the
structure of a language.
Inductive language learning ability and grammatical sensitivity are both
concerned with central processing. They account for further processing of the
segmented auditory input by the brain to infer structure, identify patterns, make
generalizations, recognize the grammatical function of elements, and formulate rules.
It is in central processing that restructuring occurs.
Example:
By first presenting learners with examples of sentences, the teacher allows the
learners to discover the structures of the sentences. The notion is that the students will
eventually notice a pattern within the examples given.
➢ Associative memory capacity/Rote learning ability is importantly concerned
with how linguistic items are stored, and with how they are recalled and used in
output. Associative memory capacity determines appropriate selection from among
the L2 elements that are stored, and ultimately determines speaker fluency. In other
words, ability to learn and retain associations between words in a new language and
their meaning in English.

Example:
When speaking, listening, writing, or reading a language, it’s either a learner
remembers a word or grammar pattern, or he doesn’t. It all depends on the learner’s
rote learning ability or his aptitude.
Linguistic Coding Differences Hypothesis (Sparks & Ganschow)
The two educational psychologists Richard Sparks and Leonore Ganschow together with
their colleagues proposed the ‘Linguistic Coding Differences Hypothesis’ (LCDH). As supported
by a series of empirical studies, the basic premise of the LCDH model lies in the argument that
native language (L1) literacy skills are essential for predicting L2 learning. For example, if a
student experiences difficulties in L1 phonology/orthography, his subsequent L2 learning will
likely to suffer as well. In other words, the Linguistic Coding Differences Hypothesis posits that
poor performance in foreign language learning may result not from affective variables, but rather,
from native language problems, inefficiency in syntactic and especially in phonological codes.
As suggested by a recent factor-analytical study, four basic components of L2 aptitude,
including students’ L1 and L2 Phonology/Orthography skills (subsuming phonemic coding and
phonological processing ability), both their L1 and L2 language analysis skills (comprising
comprehension, grammar, vocabulary, and inductive language learning), their IQ/Memory skills
(including L1 intelligence and L2 paired-associate learning measures), and self-perceptions of L2
motivation and anxiety combined to explain 76% of the variance in ultimate oral and written L2
proficiency.
Developing the LCDH, Sparks & Ganschow further argue that it is, therefore, necessary to
examine similarities and differences between the L1 and L2. This issue is particularly important
with potential negative transfer effects from morphosyllabic languages such as Chinese to
alphabetic languages such as English and vice versa. As such, they propose to include a certain
phonological measure of L1 and L2 in FL aptitude tests. In this sense, the LCDH aptitude model
as advocated by Sparks and colleagues further complements Carroll’s original four-factor view of
FL aptitude by adding the extra (sub-)component of ‘L1 and L2 phonology/orthographic decoding
skill’ as an important factor of aptitude. Extending from this model is also the highlighted call for
more serious cross-linguistic analyses between the two languages in question (L1 and L2) in future
research of FL aptitude.
Motivation
(By: Nishren I. Razuman)
Motivation is variously defined, but it is usually conceived as a construct which includes
at least the following components (see Oxford and Ehrman 1993; Dörnyei 2001):
➢ Significant goal or need
➢ Desire to attain the goal
➢ Perception that learning L2 is relevant to fulfilling the goal or meeting the need
➢ Belief in the likely success or failure of learning L2
➢ Value of potential outcomes/rewards
Types of motivation
Integrative motivation is based on interest in learning L2 because of a desire to learn about or
associate with the people who use it (e.g., for romantic reasons), or because of an intention to
participate or integrate in the L2-using speech community; in any case, emotional or affective
factors are dominant.
Instrumental motivation involves perception of purely practical value in learning the L2, such as
increasing occupational or business opportunities, enhancing prestige and power, accessing
scientific and technical information, or just passing a course in school.
Neither of these types has an inherent advantage over the other in terms of L2 achievement.
The relative effect of one or the other is dependent on complex personal and social factors: e.g.,
L2 learning by a member of the dominant group in a society may benefit more from integrative
motivation, and L2 learning by a subordinate group member may be more influenced by
instrumental motivation. Other reported motivations include altruistic reasons, general
communicative needs, desire to travel, and intellectual curiosity (Skehan 1989; Oxford and
Ehrman 1993).
More recent developments in SLA theory (Schumann 1997, 2001) suggest that motivation
for second language learning, along with L2 representation and processing, is controlled by
neurological mechanisms. Specific areas within our brain conduct a “stimulus appraisal,” which
assesses the motivational relevance of events and other stimuli and determines how we respond,
including what our attitudes and ultimately degree of effort will be.
Motivation Theory (Gardner)
According to Gardner (2001), motivation includes three elements – effort (the effort to
learn the language), desire (wanting to achieve a goal), and positive affect (enjoy the task of
learning the language). The role of orientations, which Gardner refers to as a "goal" aims to arouse
motivation and direct it to reach the goals (Gardner, 1985). Two orientations in particular
integrative orientation and instrumental orientation – were introduced by Gardner and his
associates and have been discussed and explored in L2 motivation research extensively. According
to Gardner (1985), integrative orientation refers to a positive attitude towards the L2 community
and the desire to get close to the community and even become a member of that community. As a
counterpart to integrative orientation, instrumental orientation is defined as learning an L2 for
pragmatic reasons, such as getting a better job or a higher salary.
Affect
(By: Ayessah Nesreen B. Pasagi)
Affective filters which impede language learning vary in each individual learner. This can
be personality types, anxiety, self-esteem, self-concept, or motivation. Research conducted by
Altunel (2015) revealed that personality types affect language learning. In this study, it was
revealed that extrovert types are more inclined to perform well at language production, whereas
introvert types tend to perform well at listening to and writing language lessons. This is believed
to have been because extrovert types are wired to do their best when other people are present, and
also because they are better at speaking. This is in contrast to introvert types as they are inclined
to perform well at language system learning without speech production. The anxiety level of the
introvert types is low since their language learning are administered based on their preferred
method of language learning.
Concerning the self-esteem and self-concept, these are intertwined to each other as revealed
also by the study of Altunel. Introvert types have high self-esteem and self-concept when they are
learning without other people present to observe their progress. For extrovert types, their self-
esteem and self-concept are high when observers are present to behold their progress.
Affective Filter Hypothesis (Stephen Krashen)
The Affective Filter hypothesis embodies Krashen's view that a number of 'affective
variables' play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language acquisition. These variables
include: motivation, self-confidence, anxiety and personality traits. Krashen claims that learners
with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, a low level of anxiety and extroversion
are better equipped for success in second language acquisition. Low motivation, low self-esteem,
anxiety, introversion, and inhibition can raise the affective filter and form a 'mental block' that
prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition. In other words when the filter is
'up' it impedes language acquisition. On the other hand, positive affect is necessary, but not
sufficient on its own, for acquisition to take place.

In a reverse situation, when anxiety is high, and motivation and self-esteem are low, the
affective filter will then block comprehensible input from reaching the LAD and thus hindering
the process of language production, i.e, forming a “mental block” that impedes comprehensible
input from being used for acquisition.

Implications to Language Teaching

➢ Language learners, language educators, as well as educational institutions can gain
knowledge on how to effectively adjust their learning methods, teaching methods,
and educational system according to the needs of learners and convenience of
language teachers.
➢ Gaining knowledge regarding individual differences in second language acquisition
will provide crucial knowledge to language teachers and provide stress-free and
comfortable language learning materials and instructions to language learners so as
to boost their motivation to learn second language.
Paper Presentation
(By: Prince Angel J. Roa)
Title: Investigating Attitude and Motivation of Iranian University Learners Toward English as A
Foreign Language
Author: Sima Sayadian and Anita Lashkarian
Publication Year: 2010
Theoretical Framework: Gardner’s Motivation Theory, Socio-Educational Model
Gardner’s Motivation Theory has been profoundly influential in the field of L2 motivation.
According to Lai 2013, the socio-educational model is the most influential embodiment of
Gardner’s motivation theory. In addition, MacIntyre (2007 stated that the socio-educational model
of Gardner is one of the more dominant models in the field of second language acquisition. This
model proposes that ability and motivation are the two primary individual differences variables in
second language learning. It has four components namely motivation, integrativeness, orientation,
and attitude towards the learning situation. In addition, this model also has four variables presented
by Gardner namely social milieu, individual differences, language acquisition contexts, and
outcomes.
According to Gardner (1985), motivation plays an important role in successful L2 learning.
Gardner (2001) stated that motivation has three elements. The first element is the effort to learn
the language, next is the desire to achieve the goal, and the third element is the positive affect or
the positive attitude towards the target language. There are two types of motivation, integrative
and instrumental motivation. According to Gardner (1985), integrative motivation refers to a
positive attitude towards the L2 community and the desire to get close to the community and even
become a member of that community and instrumental motivation is defined as learning an L2 for
pragmatic reasons or a desire to gain social recognition or economic advantages through
knowledge of a foreign language.
Statement of the Problems/ Research Questions:
1. What are Iranian university students’ attitudes for learning EFL?
2. What are Iranian university students’ motivations for learning EFL?
3. Does gender influence attitudes of Iranian university students for learning English as a
foreign language?
4. Does gender influence motivation of Iranian university students for learning English as a
foreign language?
5. Does major course of the study influence attitude of Iranian university students for
learning English as a foreign language?
6. Does a major course of the study influence motivations of Iranian university students for
learning English as a foreign language?
Participants:

The participants of this study were the 537 students who are randomly selected. According to the
researchers, 210 were male and 327 were female. Furthermore, the ages of the participants were
between 19 and 24. The respondents were Farsi speakers learning EFL and came from different
academic majors.

Table 4: Total Number of Participants from Different Faculties

Faculty Faculty including Different No. of Percentage
Code Departments Learners
1 Humanities: (Accounting, Commercial 257 47.85
Management, Economics, Islamic Laws,
Geography, History, Industrial Management
Library Science, Political Science,
Psychology, Social Science)
2 Literature: (Persian and Arabic) 33 0.14
3 Sciences: (Biology, Chemistry, Physics) 43 8
4 Mathematics and Statistics: 52 9.68
5 Engineering: (Civil, Computer, Electronics, 139 25.88
Industrial Eng. Mechanical Eng., Metallurgy,
Textile Eng.)
6 Natural Resources 13 2.42
Total 537 100

Research Instrument:
The research instrument used in this study was the revised Persian version of Gardner’s
AMTB. According to the researchers, the AMTB was applied in this study to identify Iranian
university students‟ attitudes and motivation toward learning English as a foreign language. The
Attitude, Motivation Test Battery or AMBT is a research instrument which has been developed to
assess the major affective components shown to be involved in second language learning. It is
comprised of scales assessing the individual's affective reactions toward various groups,
individuals and concepts associated with second language acquisition, and consequently discretion
is required of the user. The original formulations of the major concepts as well as the original items
of the AMBT was developed by Gardner (1958; 1960). The AMBT was continuously developed
overtime, and it has been used in many different forms. In addition, the composition of the
Attitude/Motivation Test Battery varies somewhat from form to form depending upon the purpose
for which it is intended. Also, the researchers stated that to further understand the learners’ attitude,
the learners were analyzed on the basis of their gender and to observe whether gender plays a
significant role among Iranian EFL learners.
Data Collection (Methodology)
The Persian version of Gardner’s AMTB questionnaire was used by the researchers in order
to obtain the data needed for the study. The questionnaire has two main sets of questions. The first
set has a total of 53 questions which was divided into seven categories. The first category has 10
questions which was designed to measure the learners’ interest in foreign language. The second
category also has 10 questions which was designed to measure attitudes toward English speakers.
The third category also has ten questions developed to measure attitudes toward learning English.
The fourth provided four questions to measure integrative Orientation. The fifth category also has
four questions to measure instrumental orientation. The sixth category on the other hand has five
questions measuring English class anxiety. The seventh and last category has 10 questions to
measure parental encouragement. The second set of questions aims to measure motivation, which
has three categories designed to measure three primary concepts in the socio-educational model.
The first category is the motivational intensity which has 10 questions. The second category is the
desire to learn EFL which also has 10 questions. The third category is the orientation index which
only have one question.
Table 1: Section A of AMTB Measuring Attitudes with its Items
Question No. Category Name

1-10 Interest in Foreign Language (IFL)

11-20 Attitudes toward English Speakers (AES)
21-30 Attitudes toward learning English (ALE)
31-34 Integrative Orientation (INTO)
35-38 (Instrumental Orientation (INSTO)
39-43 English Class Anxiety (ECA)
44-53 Parental Encouragement (PE)

Table 2: Section B of AMTB Measuring Motivation with its Items

Question No. Category Name
54-63 Motivational Intensity
64-73 Desire to Learn English
74 Orientation Index

Data Analysis: Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and T-test

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
➢ ANOVA, which stands for Analysis of Variance, is a statistical test used to analyze the
difference between the means of more than two groups. A one-way ANOVA uses one
independent variable (Bevans, 2020). According to the researchers, in this study, ANOVA
was applied to check for analyzing different categories of motivation.
T-test
➢ A t-test is a hypothesis test of the mean of one or two normally distributed populations.
According to Glen (n.d.) the t-test tells you how significant the differences between groups
are. T-test will let you know if differences between groups which are measured in means,
could have happened by chance. In this study, the researchers applied the t-test to check
for the frequencies of subcategories for attitude with which the categories occurred.
Findings
This study used the revised Persian version of Gardner’s Attitude Motivation Test Battery
(AMTB) to know the Iranian University students’ attitude and motivation towards learning English
as a foreign language. The questionnaire was then composed of two sets and the first set was
composed of 53 questions which was divided into seven categories.
On the first category (Interest in Foreign Language or IFL), the researchers found out that
both of the male and female non-English major students at Yazd University showed a high attitude
towards EFL. On the second category (Attitudes toward English speakers or AES) the students,
both male and female showed a tendency towards low attitude (60% and 50%) but the researchers
found out that they were highly oriented (91.86% and 89.87%, respectively) with their attitude
towards learning English (ALE). In the fourth category, Integrative Orientation (INTO), both
participants have high percentages (65.86% and 66.76%). The same thing goes in the fifth category
(Instrumental Orientation or INSTO) wherein both participants are said to be highly instrumentally
oriented (91.38% and 92.92%). As for the sixth category (English Class Anxiety or ECA), the
male students indicated lower attitude compared to the female students (47.82% and 51.69%).
According to the researchers, there were not much difference between the attitudes, but it was
stated that the male learners showed a tendency of having a low attitude on the English class
anxiety (ECA) category. On the Parental Encouragement (PE) category, both male and female
students showed a slightly high attitude (69.30% and 72.98%).
To answer the research questions, here are the researchers’ findings on the study they conducted.
1. What are Iranian University students’ attitudes for learning EFL?
➢ According to the researchers, the students of Natural Resources Faculty have lower
attitudes (84.61%) towards EFL compared to the students in the Engineering Faculty who
has a perfectly high attitude towards EFL (100%)
2. What are Iranian university students’ motivations for learning EFL?
➢ As stated by the researchers, based on the results of their study, Iranian female learners at
the university level reported slightly greater in both instrumental and integrative
motivation than the male students in terms of learning English.
3. Does gender influence attitudes of Iranian university students for learning English as a
foreign language?
➢ It was stated by the researchers that female learners were shown to be different from male
learners only in their interest in foreign language.
4. Does gender influence motivation of Iranian university students for learning English as a
foreign language?
➢ It was stated that orientation index and desire to learn in English do not play an active
role in relation to gender.
5. Does major course of the study influence attitude of Iranian university students for
learning English as a foreign language?
➢ As stated by the researchers, the students’ attitude towards learning English proved to be
insignificant in all the subcategories of attitudes except in the first category (Interest in
Foreign Language or IFL). It has a value of 0.020.
6. Does a major course of the study influence motivations of Iranian university students for
learning English as a foreign language?
➢ According to the researchers, there was no significant relationship between the categories
in relation to the learners’ majors.
Conclusion
The researchers stated that the importance of interest in foreign language (IFL) as one of
the significant factors for the students’ attitudes in learning English as a foreign language. Based
on the results of their study, Iranian female learners at the university level reported slightly greater
in both instrumental and integrative motivation than the male students in terms of learning English.
Most people see English as a neutral medium of communication where in fact it is more
than just a language to be used in communicating. According to the researchers, the attitude
problems of their learners are a result of the culture where they have been raised. They also stated
that those who knew the problems and has solutions associated with attitude and foreign language
education has a responsibility to share what they have learned. There were multiple studies that
shows integrative-oriented learners are said to have achieve higher proficiency levels than
instrumental-oriented learners. The researchers stated that aside from raising Iranian learners‟
levels of integrative motivation, teachers can improve the contents, teaching methods, and
classroom activities to raise learners‟ interests and motivations in language learning. Keller (1984)
and McNamara (1973) suggested that to raise the students’ interest in learning, is to increase the
learners’ participation as this can increase their motivation.
Implications to Language Teaching
➢ Teachers can improve the contents, teaching methods, and classroom activities to raise
learners’ interests and motivation in language learning.
➢ Teachers must do everything they can to heighten FL/SL learning motivation by ensuring
that the materials and the tasks are communicative, non-threatening, exciting, relevant,
appropriately challenging, capable of stimulating successful performance, and presented
according to learners’ needs to help reverse any negative attitudes that might harm learners’
motivations (Oxford and Ehrman, 1993).
References
Bevans, R. (2020). An introduction to the one-way ANOVA. Retrieved from
https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/one-way-anova/
Dörnyei, Z. (2008). The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second
Language Acquisition. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Gardner, R. C. (2001). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition. In Z. Dörnyei, &
R. Schmidt (Ed.), Motivation and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 1-19). Hawaii: University
of Hawaii Press.
Gardner, R.C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning. London: Edward
Arnold.
Glen, S. (n.d.). T-Test (Student’s T-Test): Definition and Examples. From StatisticsHowTo.com:
Elementary Statistics for the rest of us! Retrieved from
https://www.statisticshowto.com/probability-and-statistics/t-test/
Lai, H. Y. T. (2013). The Motivation of Learners of English as a Foreign Language
Revisited. International Education Studies, 6(10), 90-101.
MacIntyre, P. D. (2007). Willingness to communicate in second language: Understanding the
decision to speak as a volitional process. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 564-576. doi:
10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00623
Oxford, R. and Ehrman, M. (1993). Second Language Research on Individual Differences,
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13: 188-205.
Sayadian, S. & Lashkarian, A. (2010). Investigating Attitude and Motivation of Iranian
University Learners Toward English as a Foreign Language. Contemporary Issues in Education
Research, 3(1), 137-148.
Zafar, S. & Meenakshi, K. (2012). Individual Learner Differences and Second Language
Acquisition: A Review, Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(4), 639-646.
doi:10.4304/jltr.3.4.639-646
Ortega, L. (2013). Understanding Second Language Acquisition, Understanding Language Series.
New York, NY: Routledge.