Reading and Writing

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10031-7

An investigation into learners’ ideal L2 self and its

motivational capacity

Minyoung Cho1

© Springer Nature B.V. 2020

Abstract
Although ideal L2 self has been considered an importance source of L2 motivation,
little empirical research has examined its specific properties and their motivational
capacities. This study investigates how five properties of the ideal L2 self—central-
ity, accessibility, plausibility, vividness, and the existence of plans and strategies—
predict two motivational criteria: the ideal L2 self’s self-guiding role and general
intended learning effort. It also proposes and tests an elaborateness scale for learn-
ers’ descriptions of their ideal L2 selves in order to examine how descriptive elabo-
rateness relates to the properties of the ideal L2 self and to motivation. Forty-four
students wrote narratives about their ideal L2 self, and completed a questionnaire
on specific aspects of the ideal L2 self and their motivation in general. The analy-
sis finds only centrality to be a significant predictor for intention to learn, and only
accessibility and plausibility to be significant predictors for the ideal L2 self’s self-
guiding role. The elaborateness of narratives was weakly related to a global ideal L2
self, as well as to the centrality and plausibility of the ideal L2 self. Elaborateness
was also related to future intended learning effort, but not to the ideal L2 self’s guid-
ing role.

Keywords  L2 motivation · Ideal L2 self · L2 motivational self-system · Motivational

properties · Possible selves · Content analysis

Introduction

Motivation refers to reasons for or sources of goal-directed behaviors. Second lan-

guage (L2) motivation research that has attempted to identify driving forces in L2
learning has proposed a variety of L2 motivation models. Dörnyei’s (2009) devel-
opment of the second language motivational self system (L2MSS) model marked a

* Minyoung Cho
mycho27@korea.ac.kr
1
Department of English Language and Literature, College of Liberal Arts, Korea University, 145
Anam‑ro, Seongbuk‑gu, Seoul 02841, Korea

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 M. Cho

shift in L2 motivation research by locating self-concept at the center of sources of

L2 learning motivation. Dörnyei drew on two psychological theories to develop the
L2MSS: possible selves theory (Markus & Nurius, 1986) and self-discrepancy the-
ory (Higgins, 1987). The possible selves theory proposes that individuals are moti-
vated by their current and future self-concepts, and that one’s future self serves as
a guide for one’s current behavior. The self-discrepancy theory claims that motiva-
tion arises from discomfort created by discrepancies between the current self and the
desired self. Applying these theories to language learning, Dörnyei proposed three
major components of L2 learning motivation: (a) the ideal L2 self, a self one wishes
to become; (b) the ought-to L2 self, a self one should achieve to meet others’ expec-
tations and to avoid negative evaluations from others; and (c) learning experiences,
which are directly related to one’s immediate learning environment. According to
this model, individuals’ perceptions of their current selves and expectations for their
desired selves—whether “ideal” or “ought-to”—serve as a self-guide that shapes
behaviors. A number of studies that have tested how well the model explains and
predicts L2 motivation have generally supported it (Csizér & Kormos, 2009; Papi,
2010; Papi & Teimouri, 2012, 2014; Ryan, 2009; Taguchi, Magid, & Papi, 2009).
Despite the model’s general validity for explaining L2 motivation, research based
on it has recently faced several criticisms. One of the issues concerns the concep-
tualization and operationalization of the model’s major constructs (Huang, Hsu, &
Chen, 2015; Papi, Bondarenko, Mansouri, Feng, & Jiang, 2019; Papi & Teimouri,
2014; Thompson & Vásquez, 2015). As Papi and Teimouri (2014) pointed out, ideal
L2 self and ought-to L2 self are not necessarily separable, as the ideal L2 self can
also represent internalized forms of the ought-to L2 self. Hence, Papi and Teimouri
(2014) and Papi et al. (2019) proposed that the ideal L2 self and the ought-to L2 self
should represent more sophisticated concepts, in which each notion encompasses
both the learner’s own and others’ standpoints.
Another criticism of the model pertains to its limited power to explain the moti-
vational capacity that gives rise to learner engagement in L2 learning behaviors. As
the possible selves theory claims, not all desirable selves are projected in an indi-
vidual’s self-regulatory process, and certain conditions must be met if a self is to
serve as a self-guide. Dörnyei (2009) specified several qualities of the desirable L2
self as motivational properties, such as the availability of an elaborate and vivid self
image and the perceived plausibility of the self. Nonetheless, as noted by Hessel
(2015), although these features are essential components to account for the motiva-
tional capacities of the self, they have not received sufficient empirical attention. It
is important to look more closely at these properties to better understand the moti-
vational capacity of the self, which leads to engagement, action, and achievement
(Csizér & Kormos, 2009; Dörnyei & Chan, 2013).
While the current study explores the motivational power of the self, it focuses on
the ideal L2 self in the L2MSS. Despite research documenting the ideal L2 self’s
role as a key driver in learner motivation, its nature remains obscure (e.g., Gu &
Cheung, 2016; Hessel, 2015; Lamb, 2012). It is true that the role of ought-to L2 self
needs more attention, as Papi et al. (2019) recently suggested. They noted that pre-
vious studies’ findings of the weak or insignificant role of ought-to L2 self (Csizér
& Kormos, 2009; Papi, 2010; Papi & Teimouri, 2012, 2014; Ryan, 2009; Taguchi

13
An investigation into learners’ ideal L2 self and its…

et al., 2009) could be an artifact of biased operationalizations of intended effort, and

that a certain type of ought-to L2 self might play a more important role than the
ideal L2 self. Nonetheless, the goal of the present study is to understand the self-
driven and internalized nature of motivational antecedents as they are represented in
learners’ cognition. Compared to ought-to L2 self which is mostly related to short-
term goals, and obligations and realities of the situation, ideal L2 self represents a
more distal goal and reflects learners’ vision of their future. Thus, it is considered
that investigating ideal L2 self can better illuminate the self-determined nature of
one’s motivation.
Focusing on the ideal L2 self in L2MSS, this study investigates the motivational
capacity of several properties of the ideal L2 self—centrality, vividness, desirability,
plausibility, and the existence of action plans and strategies. Although these features
have been investigated in the study of self-concepts in other fields such as social
psychology (Norman & Aron, 2003; Oyserman, Bybee, & Terry, 2006; Oyserman,
Bybee, Terry, & Hart-Johnson, 2004; Oyserman & James, 2009), they have rarely
been empirically investigated in SLA (cf. Hessel, 2015). Therefore, this study exam-
ines how these attributes are related to conventional measurements of the global
ideal L2 self (e.g., Papi, 2010; Ryan, 2009; Taguchi et al., 2009), and explores how
well they predict motivational measures of its self-guiding role and intended learn-
ing effort. In particular, the study attempts to access personalized representations
of the ideal L2 self by examining learners’ written narratives about their ideal L2
selves. The study also proposes an analytical framework for assessing the elaborate-
ness of an ideal L2 self description, and explores the relationship between degree of
elaborateness and the motivational capacity of the ideal L2 self.

Literature review

At the core of Dörnyei’s (2009) L2 motivational self system lies the learner’s self-
concept. Self-concept refers to one’s own judgment of one’s past, current, and future
selves, which are constructed not only by oneself but by significant others (Higgins,
1987). Research on motivation largely focuses on the future dimension of the self,
although this future dimension is constructed in relation to past and current selves.
Dörnyei (2009) argued that an individual’s ideal L2 self and ought-to L2 self func-
tion as goals for language learning. Although the current study investigates the ideal
L2 self in L2MSS, it also considers possible selves theory (Markus & Nurius, 1986),
which influenced the development of L2MSS, to serve as a useful framework to
elaborate the construct of the ideal L2 self. Possible selves and L2MSS share the
view that the desirable future self can serve as a behavioral standard from which one
can initiate actions. In addition, as possible selves theory is intended to explain the
psychological source of motivated behaviors in general, it offers detailed descrip-
tions of properties of the self-concept that guide individuals’ behavior.
According to Markus and Nurius (1986), possible selves refers to self-knowl-
edge as to “how individuals think about their potential and about their future” (p.
954). Individuals’ repertoire of possible selves can represent personally significant
hopes, fears, and fantasies, which are constructed on the basis of self-knowledge

13
 M. Cho

in reference to the past and the future. Through their possible selves, individuals
understand what is possible for them based on their past experiences and current
self-knowledge, and these particularized and individualized self-concepts frame and
guide new behavior. Self-schemes are formed in light of one’s past experiences, and
this process allows possible selves to become individualized and personalized (Oys-
erman & Markus, 1990).
However, not all possible selves serve as behavioral standards. Markus and
Nurius (1986) posited that specific qualities of the self-concept—how it is repre-
sented in the mind—explain how it leads to action. Oyserman et  al. (2004) sug-
gested the term “self-regulatory possible selves” to refer to distinct subsets of pos-
sible selves that have motivational and behavioral power; in this view, possible
selves are incorporated into an individual’s regulatory system, accompanied by self-
defining goals and specific behavioral strategies. As with possible selves, not every
aspect of the ideal L2 self (e.g., a fluently communicating L2 self; a traveling L2
self) will serve as a behavioral standard (e.g., Hoyle & Sherrill, 2006). Certain types
of ideal L2 self may have stronger motivational capacity than others. This may be
because the consequences of not achieving an ideal self are detrimental (i.e., the
feared self), or because a certain ideal L2 self is activated in one’s working cognition
more frequently through various reminders or personally relevant events (Dörnyei,
2009). From this perspective, having a better understanding of mental representa-
tions of ideal L2 self and its qualities seems crucial for understanding its motiva-
tional capacity.
For these reasons, it will be useful to examine how the ideal L2 self has been
operationalized and how its motivational capacity has been gauged in previous L2
research. Previous studies on L2MSS have generally adopted multiple Likert-scale
items to tap into one global ideal L2 self, which, however, could be divided into
specific types of ideal L2 self. Examples from a widely adopted questionnaire devel-
oped by Taguchi et al. (2009) include “I often imagine myself speaking English as
if I were a native speaker of English” and “I can imagine myself living abroad and
having a discussion in English.” A global measure of ideal L2 self that is composed
of such items may represent a unitary ideal L2 self who can, for example, both speak
like a native speaker and use language to communicate with others in English. How-
ever, from the multiple ideal L2 selves perspective, as in possible selves, each state-
ment only represents different types of ideal L2 self (e.g., a self making international
friends, a self living abroad), and learner responses represent the strength of desires
for specific types of ideal L2 selves that L2 learners may generally endorse. Indeed,
previous studies have shown high reliability for different types of ideal L2 self, con-
stituting a global ideal L2 self (e.g., Taguchi et  al., 2009), and such standardized
questionnaires are useful for establishing comparability and validity.
Nonetheless, such global measures are limited in that they cannot assess which
type of ideal L2 self is personally meaningful and significant for a given learner’s
motivation, as not all desired ideal L2 selves have equal motivational capacity. In
other words, the conventional measurements of the global ideal L2 self may fully
capture neither qualitative differences in the ideal L2 selves of different learners nor
differences in their motivational capacity. Considering that individuals have multiple
ideal L2 selves and each type has a different representation in individuals’ cognition,

13
An investigation into learners’ ideal L2 self and its…

it is likely that one type of significant ideal L2 self may have stronger motivational
power for one learner than multiple, but not significant, ideal L2 selves might have
for another learner. Furthermore, this kind of conventional survey provides insuf-
ficient information about specific qualities of the ideal L2 self such as its desirabil-
ity and accessibility as well as perceived discrepancies between current and future
selves (Hessel, 2015). Markus and Nurius (1986) claimed that possible selves are
not “just any set of imagined roles or states of being,” but are “individually sig-
nificant” and personalized “hopes, fears, and fantasies” (p. 954). Furthermore, the
assumption that the content of possible selves influences the self-regulatory func-
tions of the selves seems to have some empirical grounds (Oyserman & James,
2009). Following these prior studies, the current study argues that research on the
ideal L2 self, too, should be able to address personalized aspects of ideal selves.
Drawing on the possible selves theory, Dörnyei (2014, pp. 9–10) delineated nine
qualities of ideal and ought-to L2 selves that are associated with their motivational
power. The first is that (a) “the learner has a desired future self-image” that can
be easily thought of. The remaining eight are that the future self-image (b) “is suf-
ficiently different from the current self”; (c) “is elaborate and vivid”; (d) “is per-
ceived as plausible”; (e) “is not perceived as comfortably certain to reach”; (f) “is in
harmony with other parts of the individual’s self-concept”; (g) “is accompanied by
relevant and effective procedural strategies that act as a roadmap towards the goal”;
(h) “is regularly activated in the learner’s working self-concept”; and (i) “is offset
by a counteracting feared possible self in the same domain.” Some of these aspects
are represented in conventional measures of the ideal L2 self. For instance, the ques-
tionnaire statement “I often imagine myself speaking English as if I were a native
speaker of English” represents the existence and the frequency of activation of the
ideal L2 self. Nonetheless, this alone is insufficient to capture multiple properties of
the ideal L2 self that are necessary to explain motivational behaviors.
Although Dörnyei (2009, 2014) provided theoretical accounts of the motiva-
tional capacity of self-concepts in his model, there has been little research interest
in detailed descriptions of the ideal L2 self. Hessel (2015) investigated how vari-
ous motivational properties of the ideal L2 self are associated with its motivating
power. She adopted the construct of a general “fluent L2 self,” and examined how
this global L2 self is represented differently across individuals in terms of its desir-
ability, accessibility, plausibility, and discrepancy with the current self-concept. Her
regression analyses indicated a general convergence of the various properties of the
ideal L2 self with the conventional global measures. She also found that accessibil-
ity—how frequently the fluent self is activated in learners’ working cognition—was
the most significant predictor of learners’ intended effort, followed by perceived dis-
crepancy between the current self and the desired self, and the strength of the desir-
ability of the L2 self.
Although Hessel’s (2015) study furthered our understanding of the properties of
the ideal L2 self that are related to its motivational capacity, it has some limitations.
While the study intended to tap into individualized representations of the fluent
L2 self, the notion of fluent L2 self may be too broad to represent the personalized
aspects of the ideal L2 self. In other words, Hessel’s study may not have provided
enough opportunity for learners to conjure up their real, and personalized, ideal L2

13
 M. Cho

self in sufficient detail. It is necessary to elicit a more personalized ideal L2 self,

rather than eliciting responses to a presupposed generic ideal L2 self.

The present study

As the review of the literature on Dörnyei’s (2009) L2MSS suggests, convention-

ally adopted measures of the ideal L2 self are too generic to address its personalized
aspects. In addition, specific properties of the ideal L2 self that are useful to under-
stand its motivational capacity are under-researched. Therefore, the present study
attempts to understand specific attributes of ideal L2 self that predict its motiva-
tional capacity, and thus impel action, by drawing on learners’ written narratives to
access their personalized ideal L2 selves.

Motivational properties of the ideal L2 self

Theoretical accounts and empirical studies on desired selves (Dörnyei, 2009, 2014;
Oyserman & James, 2009) suggest several key motivational properties: (a) acces-
sibility, (b) plausibility, (c) centrality, (d) vividness, and (e) the existence of action
plans and strategies. Accessibility represents the ease of access to the ideal L2 self,
which becomes available if the self exists in learners and if the self has been fre-
quently activated. Plausibility refers to the perceived likelihood of the ideal L2 self
becoming a reality. This component is particularly important in sustaining learner
effort because if the learner sees the desired self as impossible to attain and expe-
riences continuous failure to achieve the goal, the learner is likely to give up on
achieving the desired self regardless of the strength of her or his aspiration (Oyser-
man & Fryberg, 2006). Perceived belief in one’s competence vis-à-vis a goal has
been shown to be an important antecedent of self-regulatory action (Bandura, 1997).
In addition to accessibility and plausibility, which were examined by Hessel
(2015), the current study further examines centrality, vividness, and the existence of
action plans and strategies as potential sources of motivation. Centrality represents
the importance of the L2-related self in relation to the general ideal self. This con-
struct is based on possible selves theory (Markus & Nurius, 1986), which assumes
that multiple ideal selves exist, but that only those with particular significance to
one’s aspirations and hopes can become sources of motivation. Thus, the centrality
of the ideal L2 self reflects how salient the L2-related self is among all of an indi-
vidual’s hoped-for future selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986). The next characteristic is
vividness, which refers to the degree of specificity and elaborateness of the image
of the ideal L2 self in one’s cognition (Dörnyei, 2009); its importance has been sup-
ported by previous studies (Al-Shehri, 2009; Dörnyei & Chan, 2013; You, Dörnyei,
& Csizér, 2016). Finally, the regulatory function of the self emphasizes the impor-
tance of specific action plans and strategies for the ideal L2 self in giving rise to
action, but this relationship also has not been empirically investigated.
Moreover, to examine the motivational capacity of the self, the present study
addresses two motivational criteria: the self-guiding role of the ideal L2 self

13
An investigation into learners’ ideal L2 self and its…

and intended learning effort. This aspect of the study is in line with Papi et al.’s
(2019) argument that the “hypothetical nature” of intended effort can be the
source of potential problems. They argued that responses to items that refer to
the future (e.g., “I would like to spend lots of time studying English”) have little
direct relevance to actual motivated behaviors. Concurring with this argument,
the present study investigates the motivational capacity of the self in two ways:
one based on the actual motivational function of the self in having guided learn-
ers to the present; and the other based on learners’ intentions for L2 learning, as
in previous research (e.g., Taguchi et al., 2009).

Elicitation of a personalized ideal L2 self: written narratives

As mentioned, the composite-based questionnaire is limited in revealing quali-

tative differences in individuals’ ideal L2 selves. To better understand the self-
directing function of the ideal L2 self, this study argues, it is necessary to examine
each learner’s individualized and personalized ideal L2 self, which is incorpo-
rated into the individual’s working cognition (Ruvolo & Markus, 1992). There-
fore, the present study adopts L2 narrative writing as a tool to encourage learners
to envisage and articulate their ideal L2 selves. The narratives are also used to
measure the elaborateness of the representation of the self, which is defined as
the degree of personalization and particularization of the ideal L2 self. Although
narratives have not been widely used to study L2 motivation, other research has
employed them as a means to understand cognition. Rathbone, Salgado, Akan,
Havelka, and Bernsten (2016), for example, tried to gauge the vividness, positiv-
ity, and rehearsal (i.e., frequency of activation) of individuals’ possible selves by
examining the ways they described their identities in narratives.
The aim of using written narratives as a research tool is to provide learners a
venue to recall and envision their ideal L2 self, and to collect information about
how the self is represented in the learners’ cognition. This method is expected to
be effective in eliciting descriptions of personalized L2 selves, in that the learners
must both envisage their ideal L2 self and maintain the image while they write
(Cho, 2015). From an empirical standpoint, the narratives should also be useful
for triangulating data on the ideal L2 self in its motivational capacity. Written
narratives also give researchers or practitioners access to the contents of learners’
ideal L2 selves. Finally, this study proposes a method to rate the elaborateness of
learners’ written narratives, and examines this new tool’s validity by examining
how it is associated with conventional measures of the ideal L2 self and its moti-
vational capacity.
Specifically, this study investigates the following questions:

RQ1 Which of the five properties of the ideal L2 self (i.e., accessibility, plau-
sibility, centrality, vividness, and the existence of plans and strategies) predict
its motivational capacity in terms of its self-guiding role and intended learning
effort?

13
 M. Cho

RQ2 How is the elaborateness rating of an ideal L2 self narrative related to the
global measure of the ideal L2 self, specific properties of the ideal L2 self, and
motivational capacity in terms of its self-guiding role and intended effort?

Method

Participants

Forty-four Korean college students enrolled in general English courses at a pri-

vate university in Seoul participated in the study. The students had diverse majors.
Thirteen of them had lived or studied abroad for periods ranging from 8 months to
7  years. The participants’ English levels were high-intermediate to advanced (ibt
TOEFL: M = 105.84, SD = 11.14); this proficiency range was chosen with the expec-
tation that participants at these levels could easily narrate their ideal L2 self in writ-
ten English. They participated voluntarily, and earned extra credit in their English
course.

Instruments

Narrative writing

First, the participants were asked to imagine and write about their future ideal L2
self. In order to familiarize students with the construct of ideal L2 self, they were
given a verbal explanation of the ideal L2 self as a desirable image or state of the
self one wishes to become as an L2-English speaker, which can serve as a goal for
English learning. In addition, they were provided an essay prompt, which asked
the participants to describe a hoped-for future scenario in which they had achieved
their ideal L2 self. The prompt included questions intended to elicit learners’ ideal
L2 self in various domains of life such as school, career, travel, and relations with
friends and family; for example, how would it be like to achieve the desirable ideal
L2 self, and how English is used in different domains of life. However, they were
also asked to consider their general ideal self; this part of the prompt was intended
to access the importance or centrality of the ideal L2 self in learners’ general suc-
cess (“Appendix  1”). Although the prompt questions guided learners to envisage
their existing ideal L2 self in a detailed manner, the instructions also emphasized
that they should differentiate the ideal L2 self from mere fantasies by writing about
a self-image that they actually held and that guided their present efforts and had led
to their achievements.

Questionnaire

The participants also completed a questionnaire of six-point Likert-scale items,

which consisted of two sections. The first part pertained to specific properties of the
ideal L2 self, inquiring into learners’ perceptions and beliefs about the scenario they

13
An investigation into learners’ ideal L2 self and its…

had just written. It included questions about the accessibility, plausibility, centrality,
and vividness of the described ideal self, as well as the existence of plans and strate-
gies to achieve that ideal self. It further inquired into how the just-narrated ideal L2
self had guided the course of their English learning to the present, which was taken
to indicate the self-guiding role of the ideal L2 self. These survey items were based
on previous studies’ suggestions of motivational conditions of the self (Dörnyei,
2009, 2014; Oyserman & James, 2009).
The second part of the questionnaire employed items from conventional measures
of the ideal L2 self and general intentions to learn English. Adopted from Taguchi
et al. (2009), these items asked students whether they could imagine a specific type
of ideal L2 self, and whether they were willing to exert effort for English learning.
Table  1 provides examples of questionnaire items and information on the internal
reliability of the items for each construct.
As Table  1 indicates, the internal consistency of survey items was found to be
generally acceptable as measured via Cronbach’s alpha. However, the measurement
of vividness was not considered reliable (α = .31), so vividness was removed for the
further analysis.

Procedures

The participants were informed of the procedure of the study, and they signed a con-
sent form. The concept of ideal L2 self was explained to them, and the essay prompt
questions were discussed. The participants then had 30–40 min to write the essay.
When they finished writing, the participants completed the questionnaire.

Measurement: qualitative assessment of learner narrative writing

This study developed an elaborateness rating of learner writing as a way of deter-

mining the degree of specificity or detail of learners’ ideal L2 selves as reflected in
their essays. This rating was based on Yowell’s (2000) specificity rating of occu-
pational hoped-for selves. Yowell explored diverse aspects of learners’ hoped-for
selves elicited in interviews; in addition to specificity, the study examined frequency,
controllability, and priority of hoped-for selves as well as the balance between
hoped-for and feared selves. However, for the purpose of the current study, only the
specificity rating was adopted and modified for the development of the elaborateness
scale.
The elaborateness rating is grounded on five features of the ideal L2 self: (a) the
existence of self-defined goals and the centrality of the L2-related self (among the
learners’ other possible selves), (b) the degree of personalization of the description,
(c) the existence of plans and strategies to achieve the ideal self, and (d) the relation
of the ideal self to the current self, and (e) strategies to overcome potential obstacles
(“Appendix  2”). Based on a rubric, two coders assessed the elaborateness of each
description of an ideal L2 self. The two coders separately coded the narratives and
compared their ratings. Inter-coder reliability was 80%. The coders discussed the
inconsistencies and reached agreement on the remaining 20%.

13
13
Table 1  Examples of items on ideal L2 self properties and motivational criteria
Constructs
Properties of the ideal L2 self Centrality (n = 2, α= .754)
Accessibility (n = 2, α = .686)
Plausibility (n = 2, α = .859)
Existence of strategies and plans (n = 2, α = .734)
Vividness (n = 2, α = .307)
Criterion measure Self-guiding roles of the ideal L2 self (n = 2, α = .617)
Ideal L2 self (Conventional) (n = 5, α = .848)
Intended learning effort (Conventional) (n = 5, α = .862) I will take every opportunity available for me to improve my English
Examples
For me, being a good English speaker as described in the above scenario is a key
factor for determining my future success
Since I already had a desirable future self image, I could easily imagine the
scenario
I think the future scenario is quite plausible
I have specific plans and strategies to be an ideal English speaker as described
above
In the above writing, I had a hard time visualizing my future self. (reversed)
The above scenario has frequently motivated me to work hard
I often imagine myself speaking English fluently with international friends or
colleagues
M. Cho
An investigation into learners’ ideal L2 self and its…

Results and discussions

Specific properties of the ideal L2 self and motivational measures

The first research question investigates the predictive power of properties of the
ideal L2 self for the two motivational measures: (a) the self-guiding role of the ideal
L2 self, and (b) intended learning effort. Before addressing this question, correla-
tions between attributes of the ideal L2 self and global measure of the ideal L2 self
were examined. Results from Pearson correlations appear in Table 2.
As can be seen in Table 2, centrality was the only property that was significantly
correlated with the global measure of the ideal L2 self (r = .56). No significant rela-
tionships were observed between the global ideal L2 self and other features of the
ideal L2 self. Thus, only the centrality of the personalized ideal L2 seems to rep-
resent some aspects of the global ideal L2 self. In addition, significant correlations
existed among specific properties of the ideal L2 self: accessibility and plausibil-
ity (r = .45); accessibility and the existence of action plans and strategies (r = .38);
and plausibility and strategies (r = .42). However, centrality was not related to any
other aspect of the ideal L2 self, suggesting that centrality may function differently
from the other properties. Another Pearson correlation was run between the two
dimensions of motivation. It was found that the ideal L2 self’s self-guiding role and
intended learning effort were significantly related, but as indicated by the moder-
ate magnitude (r = .39, p < .05), they can be considered to represent distinct aspects
of motivation. Hence, findings will be presented separately for each motivational
criterion.
Turning to the main analysis, to answer RQ1, which examines how specific fea-
tures of the ideal L2 self predict the motivational capacity of the ideal L2 self, two
multiple regression analyses were conducted with the stepwise method for the two
motivational criteria (i.e., self-guiding role and intended learning effort). First, the
four predictor variables—accessibility, plausibility, centrality, strategies and plans—
were entered as independent variables, and the ideal L2 self’s self-guiding function
was entered as a dependent variable. Table  3 provides the results of the stepwise
regression analysis.
As Table  3 shows, accessibility and plausibility emerged as significant factors to
predict the self-guiding role of the ideal L2 self (F(2,41) = 10.59, p = .00), and no other

Table 2  Correlations between global ideal L2 self (IS) and specific properties (n = 44)
Global IS Centrality Accessibility Plausibility Strategies
and plans

Global IS 1
Centrality .560** 1
Accessibility .097 .070 1
Plausibility .134 .152 .454** 1
Strategies and plans .209 .271 .383* .423** 1

*p < .05; **p < .01

13
 M. Cho

Table 3  Stepwise multiple regression of properties of the ideal L2 self on its self-guiding function
Step Variable entered B Std. error Std. beta T Sig. Adjusted
R squared

1 Accessibility .322 .120 .381 2.677 .011 .251

2 Plausibility .248 .117 .302 2.119 .040 .309

predictors were found to be significant. Accessibility alone explained 25.1% of the vari-
ance (β = .32, p = .01), and plausibility accounted for an additional 5.8% of the variance
of the self-guiding function of the ideal L2 self (β = .25, p = .04). A one-unit increase
in accessibility leads to an increase of .32 in self-guiding role score; similarly, a one-
unit increase in plausibility leads to an increase of .25 in self-guiding role score. These
findings suggest that the accessibility and plausibility of the ideal L2 self are crucial for
making it a self-guide. In contrast, the centrality of the ideal L2 self and the presence of
specific plans and strategies for the ideal self are not crucial for the self to be used as a
behavioral standard. Next, to identify the role of specific attributes of the ideal L2 self
in the future dimension of motivation, measured via intended learning effort, another
stepwise regression was run with the four properties of the ideal L2 self as predictor
variables and intended learning effort as an outcome variable. The results appear in
Table 4.
As can be seen in Table 4, the centrality of the ideal L2 self was the only significant
predictor of intended learning effort, F(1,42) = 23.27, p = .00. An increase of a one-unit
of centrality leads to .53 increase of intended learning effort (β = .53; p = .00). As indi-
cated by adjusted R-squared, centrality accounting for 34.1% of the variance. This find-
ing indicates that relatively high importance of the L2-specific self in relation to the
general ideal self may lead learners to be determined to exert effort, although it is not
possible to know whether such a determination transfers to actual action.
The findings from the two regression analyses show that different properties of ideal
L2 self may play different roles in regard to the two different aspects of motivational
criteria (i.e., the self-guiding role, intended learning effort). Centrality was associated
with intended effort, but not with the ideal L2 self’s self-guiding role. Conversely,
accessibility and plausibility failed to predict intended learning effort, but were signifi-
cantly related to the ideal L2 self’s self-guiding function.
The contrasting findings for centrality and the other features can be attributed to
their different natures, particularly in terms of the degree of internalization. The cen-
trality of the ideal L2 self can derive from both learner-internal and learner-external
factors. Learners’ perception of the importance of the L2 can develop through their
own experiences, but can also arise from social expectations and other external factors.
This means that centrality does not belong solely to the domain of the ideal L2 self,

Table 4  Stepwise multiple regression of properties of the ideal L2 self on intended learning effort
Step Variable entered B Std. error Std. beta T Sig. Adjusted R squared

1 Centrality .532 .110 .597 4.824 .000 .341

13
An investigation into learners’ ideal L2 self and its…

but may be affected by others, as partly represented in the ought-to L2 self. In contrast,
accessibility and plausibility require some level of consciousness and autonomy on the
part of the learner, as an accessible and plausible self means that the ideal L2 self must
be alive in the learner’s cognition. Taking these findings together, it appears that learn-
ers are motivated to exert effort when they believe the L2-related self is important (i.e.,
centrality), but whether the ideal L2 self serves as a behavioral standard depends on
how internalized the self image is, particularly in relation to the accessibility and plau-
sibility of the ideal L2 self in learners’ cognition.
The finding regarding the importance of accessibility and plausibility in predict-
ing the self-guiding role of the ideal L2 self is in line with previous studies (Hoyle
& Sherrill, 2006; Norman & Aron, 2003; Oyserman et  al., 2006). For example,
Norman and Aron (2003) examined the role of accessibility in predicting motiva-
tion. They used response times to measure the accessibility of particular possible
selves provided by the researcher, where a shorter response time indicates that the
self is more accessible. They found that accessibility was a significant predictor for
individuals’ motivation to achieve important possible selves. Enhanced accessibil-
ity to such selves is important not only because it affects learner motivation and
behaviors, but also because it facilitates the creation of a constant and enduring self-
concept (Ruvolo & Markus, 1992). Furthermore, the current study’s finding on the
importance of plausibility in learner motivation aligns with findings from Oyserman
et  al.’s (2006) study. They implemented an educational intervention that provided
low-income and minority teens with conceivable strategies and contexts to help the
participants perceive possible selves as true or plausible. The study found that this
kind of support improved students’ academic motivation and behaviors in school.
The current findings, too, appear to support the claim that an ideal L2 self must be
perceived as possible to attain with reasonable effort if it is to be incorporated in
learners’ self-regulatory system.
Next, the finding that the presence of action plans and strategies was not a sig-
nificant predictor for either the self’s self-guiding role or learners’ intended learn-
ing effort contradicts existing literature. According to the possible selves theory,
action plans and strategies must be part of self-regulation to compel action (Hoyle
& Sowards, 1993; Markus & Nurius, 1986). Put differently, it is an action plan that
transforms general ideas into action (Hoyle & Sherrill, 2006). However, this study’s
findings failed to support this claim, which may be explained by the differences in
time focus in learners’ descriptions of their ideal L2 selves (e.g., Hoyle & Sherrill,
2006; Oyserman & Fryberg, 2006; Oyserman & James, 2009). In the current study,
some participants wrote about an ideal L2 self of 2  years hence, others about an
ideal L2 self in 30  years’ time. According to temporal construal theory (Trope &
Liberman, 2003), the construal of events in the temporally distant future tends to
be general and abstract, yet with clear goals. In contrast, the construction of events
in the near future is likely to be more concrete and specific, yet with little goal-
directedness. From this account, it seems unlikely that learners possessing an ideal
L2 self in the distant future have specific plans, even though this ideal L2 self can
influence learners’ self-regulatory process of learning. These findings indicate that
having action plans and strategies is not necessarily related to the ideal L2 self’s
goal-directing function or the learners’ general intention to learn the L2.

13
 M. Cho

Elaborateness and the motivational components

Grounded on the importance of a concrete and detailed image of an ideal L2 self

in learner motivation, the second research question addresses how narrative elabo-
rateness is related to the conventional ideal L2 self and other self-reported specific
attributes of the ideal L2 self. It also examines the relationship of elaborateness with
the two motivational criterion measures. The findings are provided in Table 5.
As Table 5 shows, a Pearson correlation indicated a moderate positive relation-
ship between the elaborateness rating and the conventional measures of ideal L2 self
(r = .37, p < .05). Also, the elaborateness rating was significantly associated with the
centrality (r = .34) and plausibility (r = .33) of the ideal L2 self (cf. Rathbone et al.,
2016). These findings indicate that the elaborateness scale developed for this study
is not comprehensive enough to represent various aspects of ideal L2 self. It only
suggests that learners whose L2 self is pivotal in their desired future life and who
see more possibility of achieving the ideal L2 self tend to have specific and detailed
images of it.
Regarding the relationship between elaborateness and the two motivational crite-
ria, the elaborateness rating was significantly related to learners’ intended learning
effort (r = .34), but not to the ideal self’s self-guiding role (r = .28, p > .05). As the
elaborateness rating significantly predicted intended effort, a follow-up correlation
analysis was conducted. This was to examine whether and to what extent the rating
is commensurable to the global ideal L2 self regarding its motivational capacity, as
the global ideal L2 self has been found to predict intended learning effort to a sig-
nificant extent in previous research (e.g., Taguchi et al., 2009). The results revealed
that intended learning effort was more strongly related to the ideal L2 self (r = .73,
p < .05) than to the elaborateness rating (r = .34, p < .05), indicating that the rating’s
predictive power for intended learning effort is not comparable to the global meas-
ure, although it can explain learner intention for L2 learning to some extent. While
these results remain tentative due to the potential validity issues of this elaborate-
ness rating, this measure may serve as a basis for understanding a learner’s ideal L2
self in terms of its contents and representations, which the traditional measure of the
ideal L2 self cannot observe.

Conclusions and implications

The present study explored the motivational capacity of the ideal L2 self in
Dörnyei’s (2009) L2MSS by examining specific properties of the ideal L2 self as
sources of motivated behaviors: centrality, accessibility, plausibility, vividness, and
the existence of action plans and strategies. The two motivational criteria were the
ideal L2 self’s self-guiding role and intended learning effort. In addition, the study
assessed to what extent the degree of elaborateness manifested in learners’ descrip-
tions of ideal L2 self can be used as an indicator to gauge the motivational capacity
of the ideal L2 self. Overall, the study showed that specific attributes of the ideal L2
self as well as elaborateness function slightly differently in the ideal L2 self’s self-
directing function and general intention for learning.

13
 Table 5  Correlations between elaborateness, ideal L2 self, and motivation
Global ideal L2 self Properties of ideal L2 self Motivational measures
An investigation into learners’ ideal L2 self and its…

Global IS Centrality Accessibility Plausibility Strategies and plans Self-guiding role Intended learning effort

Elaborateness .366* .343* − .022 .327* − .016 .280 .341*

*p < .05

13
 M. Cho

Several pedagogical implications can be drawn from the current study. To begin
with, the finding that the self-guiding role of the ideal L2 self is associated with
accessibility and plausibility of the self can inform the direction of efforts to enhance
learner motivation. In line with this finding and previous studies that have demon-
strated the effectiveness of imagery training for learner motivation (Arnold, Puchta,
& Rinvolucri, 2007; Chan, 2014; Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014; Dörnyei & Ushi-
oda, 2011; Magid, 2014), teachers can provide students with opportunities to visual-
ize and activate their ideal L2 self in order to enhance the ideal L2 self’s capacity as
a behavioral standard. Also, teachers can support students in building up their belief
in their capacity to achieve the desired future with reasonable effort, and provide
enough scaffolding to guide their course of action towards the achievable self.
Although the elaborateness rating only explains a small amount of learners’
intention for learning, some relationships observed in the current study provide
insights for both research and pedagogy. The study’s attempt to adopt a narrative
essay as a means to access personally meaningful ideal L2 selves opens up the pos-
sibility of examining a much broader picture of learner motivation. This method can
also enable teachers to keep track of learners’ evolving ideal L2 selves. Moreover, as
other studies have found vision to be an important sensory component in motivation
and achievement (Al-Shehri, 2009; Dörnyei & Chan, 2013; You et al., 2016), a well-
developed measure of elaborateness in learner description of the ideal L2 self can
serve as a useful barometer to further our understanding of the motivational power
of learners’ ideal self.
Next, the study’s limitations should be addressed. First, it examined only the
ideal L2 self, ignoring other components of L2MSS such as the ought-to L2 self
and learner experience. Existing studies have suggested that the ideal L2 self has
strong motivational power, but recent research has also indicated that the ought-to
L2 self may exert stronger motivational power (Huang et al., 2015; Lanvers, 2016;
Papi et al., 2019). Therefore, the motivational capacities of other components of the
model deserve further attention. Another limitation is that the selected properties
of the ideal L2 self are not comprehensive (cf. Dörnyei, 2009, 2014). Specifically,
despite the importance of vision in the model, the degree of vividness of the image
was excluded from this study because the questionnaire items failed to show accept-
able reliability. Future research should include vividness in so much as it is empha-
sized in the conceptualization of L2MSS (Dörnyei, 2009). Furthermore, degrees of
discrepancy between current and future selves, as well as the balance between desir-
able and feared selves are also considered important for learner motivation (Oyser-
man & Markus, 1990), yet these were not examined in this study. The current study
also suggested the possibility that temporal distance from a certain ideal L2 self may
be a factor in its motivational capacity. As such, further research should address a
wider array of conditions for the self’s motivating capacity.
Furthermore, it may be possible to modify the elaborateness measure to
improve its ability to predict learner motivation. In the current study, the rating
was based on bifurcated criteria (e.g., whether learners mentioned strategies or
not), but a more detailed analytical framework could help us better understand
qualitative differences in learner descriptions of the ideal L2 self. Hoyle and
Sherrill (2006) noted that “a fruitful new direction for research on possible selves

13
An investigation into learners’ ideal L2 self and its…

and behavior would be the exploration of the construct as it contributes to the

process of self-regulation” (p. 1682). In this light, explorations of learners’ ideal
L2 selves by means of detailed content analysis would contribute to our under-
standing of the regulatory function of the desirable future self.
Finally, it should be recalled that the properties of the ideal L2 self are inter-
related, although the current study did not pay much attention to this interrelat-
edness. Oyserman et  al. (2006) argued that the development of one feature of
one’s future self supports the development of another. For example, the balance
between positive possible selves (i.e., goals) and negative possible selves (i.e.,
fears) facilitates the development of strategies, because learners can strategize to
increase their chances of approaching the positive selves and avoiding the nega-
tive selves. Developing strategies in turn makes realizing possible selves seem
more likely, thus increasing plausibility (p. 188). In this study, too, correlations
among some features of the ideal L2 self were observed; the interrelatedness of
these features, and, perhaps, the synergetic effects of their interrelatedness can be
taken into account in future research.
Despite these limitations, it is hoped that the current study furthers our under-
standing of the motivational properties of the ideal L2 self, motivation, and their
capacities to impel action. In addition, the current study’s elaborateness scale
may prove useful as an initial framework on which to base a more developed
measurement that would serve diverse empirical and educational purposes.

Acknowledgements  This study was supported by a faculty research grant from the College of Liberal
Arts at Korea University in 2018.

Appendix 1: Prompts for narrative essay

Describe your ideal L2 self that you have dreamed of becoming, which have
guided you to keep studying English. Further describe possible L2-related future
that you are afraid of becoming (e.g., feared L2 self), the negative consequences
of failing to achieve the desired L2 self, if this also motivates you to study
English.
You can consider various aspects of your lives such as school, career, travel, and
relations with friends and family.
You can consider the following questions:
What motivates you to study English? What are you imagining in your successful
future? What do you see yourself doing in the future? How has English affected your
imagined life? How does English function on your typical day? What kind of envi-
ronment are you in (e.g., community, country)? How do you feel about yourself in
the situation? How did you achieve your ideal English self in relation to your current
situation and your feared L2 self (L2-related self image you are afraid of becom-
ing)? What challenges did you have and how did you overcome those challenges?
Write a narrative essay describing your successful future scenario in relation to
your ideal English self.

13
 M. Cho

Appendix 2: Elaborateness rating

Score Description

0 No self-defined goal of using English

1 Learner identifies an English-related self as an important aspect of his/her desirable future selves,
for purposes other than communication
2 Learner identifies a desirable English-related L2 self, and indicates it to be important for his/her
future. The self is presented with descriptors that are personally specific, yet the description
remains at the general communication level
3 Learner identifies a desirable English-related L2 self, and indicates it to be important for his/
her future. The self is presented with descriptors that are personally specific, and the self is
described in a personally specific and detailed manner, sometimes accompanied by emotion
4 Learner identifies a desirable English-related L2 self, and indicates it to be important for his/
her future. The self is presented with descriptors that are personally specific, and the self is
described in a personally specific and detailed manner, sometimes accompanied by emotion.
Learner also identifies plans and strategies, but the plans and strategies remain somewhat vague
5 Learner identifies a desirable English-related L2 self, and indicates it to be important for his/
her future. The self is presented with descriptors that are personally specific, and the self is
described in a personally specific and detailed manner, sometimes accompanied by emotion.
Learner identifies particular plans and strategies, and these plans and strategies are clearly
outlined
6 Learner identifies a desirable English-related L2 self, and indicates it to be important for his/
her future. The self is presented with descriptors that are personally specific, and the self is
described in a personally specific and detailed manner, sometimes accompanied by emotion.
Learner identifies particular plans and strategies, and these plans and strategies are clearly
outlined. Learner also identifies potential challenges to achieving the ideal L2 self in relation to
current L2 self, or described strategies based on these challenges

References
Al-Shehri, A. S. (2009). Motivation and vision: The relation between the ideal L2 self, imagination
and visual style. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2
self (pp. 164–171). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Arnold, J., Puchta, H., & Rinvolucri, M. (2007). Imagine that! with CD-ROM/audio CD: Mental
imagery in the EFL classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Holt.
Chan, L. (2014). Effects of an imagery training strategy on Chinese university students’ possible sec-
ond language selves and learning experiences. In K. Csizér & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of
self-concept on language learning (pp. 357–376). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Cho, M. (2015). The effects of working possible selves on second language performance. Reading and
Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 28, 1099–1118.
Csizér, K., & Kormos, J. (2009). Leaning experiences, selves and motivated learning behavior: A
comparative analysis of structural models for Hungarian secondary and university learners of
English. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp.
98–119). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation,
language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9–41). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

13
An investigation into learners’ ideal L2 self and its…

Dörnyei, Z. (2014). Future self-guides and vision. In K. Csizér & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of self-
concept on language learning (pp. 7–18). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Dörnyei, Z., & Chan, L. (2013). Motivation and vision: An analysis of future L2 self images, sensory
styles, and imagery capacity across two target languages. Language Learning, 63, 437–462.
Dörnyei, Z., & Kubanyiova, M. (2014). Motivating learners, motivating teachers: Building vision in the
language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Teaching and researching motivation (2nd ed.). Harlow: Pearson
Education.
Gu, M. M., & Cheung, D. S. P. (2016). Ideal L2 self, acculturation, and Chinese language learning among
South Asian students in Hong Kong: A structural equation modelling analysis. System, 57, 14–24.
Hessel, G. (2015). From vision to action: Inquiring into the conditions for the motivational capacity of
ideal second language selves. System, 52, 103–114.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94,
319–340.
Hoyle, R. H., & Sherrill, M. R. (2006). Future orientation in the self-system: Possible selves, self-regula-
tion, and behavior. Journal of Personality, 74, 1673–1696.
Hoyle, R. H., & Sowards, B. A. (1993). Self-monitoring and the regulation of social experience: A con-
trol-process model. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 12, 280–306.
Huang, H. T., Hsu, C. C., & Chen, S. W. (2015). Identification with social role obligations, possible
selves, and L2 motivation in foreign language learning. System, 51, 28–38.
Lamb, M. (2012). A self system perspective on young adolescents’ motivation to learn English in urban
and rural settings. Language Learning, 62, 997–1023.
Lanvers, U. (2016). Lots of selves, some rebellious: Developing the self discrepancy model for language
learners. System, 60, 79–92.
Magid, M. (2014). A motivational programme for learners of English: An application of the L2 motiva-
tional self system. In K. Csizér & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of self-concept on language learning
(pp. 333–356). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954–969.
Norman, C., & Aron, A. (2003). Aspects of future self that predict motivation to achieve or avoid it. Jour-
nal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 500–507.
Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., & Terry, K. (2006). Possible selves and academic outcomes: How and when
possible selves impel action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 188–204.
Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., Terry, K., & Hart-Johnson, T. (2004). Possible selves as roadmaps. Journal of
Research in Personality, 38, 130–149.
Oyserman, D., & Fryberg, S. A. (2006). The possible selves of diverse adolescents: content and func-
tion across gender, race and national origin. In C. Dunkel & J. Kerpelman (Eds.), Possible selves:
Theory, research, and applications (pp. 17–39). Huntington, NY: Nova.
Oyserman, D., & James, L. (2009). Possible selves: From content to process. In K. Markman, W. M. P.
Klein, & J. A. Suhr (Eds.), The handbook of imagination and mental stimulation (pp. 373–394).
Mew York, NY: Psychology Press.
Oyserman, D., & Markus, H. (1990). Possible selves in balance: Implications for delinquency. Journal of
Social Issues, 46, 141–157.
Papi, M. (2010). The L2 motivational self system, L2 anxiety, and motivated behavior: A structural equa-
tion modeling approach. System, 38, 467–479.
Papi, M., Bondarenko, A. V., Mansouri, S., Feng, L., & Jiang, C. (2019). Rethinking L2 motivation
research: The 2 × 2 model of L2 self-guides. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 337–361.
Papi, M., & Teimouri, Y. (2012). Dynamics of selves and motivation: A cross-sectional study in the EFL
context of Iran. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 22, 287–309.
Papi, M., & Teimouri, Y. (2014). Language learner motivational types: A cluster analysis study. Lan-
guage Learning, 64, 493–525.
Rathbone, C. J., Salgado, S., Akan, M., Havelka, J., & Berntsen, D. (2016). Imagining the future: A
cross-cultural perspective on possible selves. Consciousness and Cognition, 42, 113–124.
Ruvolo, A. P., & Markus, H. R. (1992). Possible selves and performance: The power of self-relevant
imagery. Social Cognition, 10, 95–124.
Ryan, S. (2009). Self and identity in L2 motivation in Japan: the ideal L2 self and Japanese learners
of English. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp.
120–143). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

13
 M. Cho

Taguchi, T., Magid, M., & Papi, M. (2009). The L2 motivational self system among Japanese, Chinese
and Iranian learners of English: A comparative study. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motiva-
tion, Language Identity and the L2 Self (pp. 66–97). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Thompson, A. S., & Vásquez, C. (2015). Exploring motivational profiles through language learning nar-
ratives. The Modern Language Journal, 99, 158–174.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal construal. Psychological Review, 110, 401–421.
You, C. J., Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (2016). Motivation, vision, and gender: A survey of learners of Eng-
lish in China. Language Learning, 66, 94–123.
Yowell, C. M. (2000). Possible selves and future orientation: Exploring hopes and fears of Latino boys
and girls. Journal of Early Adolescence, 20, 245–280.

Publisher’s Note  Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.

13