Second Language Motivation Research 2010 2019 A Synthetic Exploration

The Language Learning Journal
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/rllj20
Second language motivation research 2010–2019:

a synthetic exploration
Mohammad Hadi Mahmoodi & Moslem Yousefi
To cite this article: Mohammad Hadi Mahmoodi & Moslem Yousefi (2022) Second language
motivation research 2010–2019: a synthetic exploration, The Language Learning Journal, 50:3,
273-296, DOI: 10.1080/09571736.2020.1869809
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2020.1869809
Published online: 13 Jan 2021.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 4031
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 16 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rllj20
THE LANGUAGE LEARNING JOURNAL
2022, VOL. 50, NO. 3, 273–296
https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2020.1869809
Second language motivation research 2010–2019: a synthetic

exploration
Mohammad Hadi Mahmoodi and Moslem Yousefi
Department of English Language, Faculty of Humanities, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran
ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
This study attempts to synthesise the scholarship on second language (L2) Language learning; L2
motivation and systematically examines the theoretical approaches, motivation; research
methods, research instruments, and learning contexts found in recent methodology; research
research published between 2010 and 2019. Following a comprehensive synthesis
survey of six influential, high-impact journals in the field, 100 motivation
studies were identified that met our eligibility criteria. The publications
were coded for the samples, research paradigms, methodological
approaches, frameworks, data collection methods, and reporting practices
(e.g. piloting, reliability estimates). Frequencies and percentages of
publication characteristics were then calculated. Among other results (e.g.
the need to look at motivation from the Global South perspectives,
development of different theoretical approaches, the rise of qualitative
research), the study revealed that the vast majority of publications employ
the L2 Motivational Self System model as an analytical framework and this
orientation relates to its adaptability to different applied contexts.
Methodologically, although studies in this domain differ in reporting of
instrumentation, real improvements in terms of methodological quality
and transparency in reporting practices, particularly regarding effect sizes,
are recommended. In addition, although the motivational publications
most often employ quantitative methods to collect data, future
explorations need to embrace innovative research methods (such as
idiodynamics, Q methodology, retrodictive qualitative modelling) in order
to investigate motivational dynamics. The study concludes with useful
directions for future motivation research.
Introduction
Second language acquisition (SLA) research recognises and confirms the core role of motivation in
second or foreign language (L2) learning. Within the field of SLA, motivation is regarded as one of the
most important predictors of successful L2 learning and students’ task achievement (Dörnyei 2019).
In the past two decades, an increasing body of studies have been conducted examining learner
motivation in terms of future self-guides and vision (e.g. Dörnyei 2014a; Dörnyei and Chan 2013;
Dörnyei and Kubanyiova 2014; You, Dörnyei and Csizér 2016), motivational strategies (e.g. Alrabai
2016; Guilloteaux 2013; Lamb 2019), task motivation (e.g. Dörnyei 2019; Kormos and Wilby 2019),
motivational dynamics (e.g. Dörnyei, MacIntyre and Henry 2015; Waninge, Dörnyei and de Bot
2014), engagement (e.g. Mercer and Dörnyei 2020), and directed motivational currents (Dörnyei
et al. 2016; Muir 2020). In spite of the fact that motivation research in second language acquisition
has refined our understanding and knowledge of L2 motivation, we need to marshal the findings and
provide an integrative synthesis of research findings. For this purpose, we present a synthetic review
CONTACT Mohammad Hadi Mahmoodi mhmahmoodi@basu.ac.ir

© 2021 Association for Language Learning
274 M. H. MAHMOODI AND M. YOUSEFI
of research on L2 motivation, attempting to chart a critical orientation to the scope of motivational

research in SLA. Since we are aware of the paucity of this type of synthesis in the field of applied
linguistics (Visonà and Plonsky 2020), we employ it in our study to review the nature and character-
istics of empirical studies of L2 motivation, consider the range and nature of research activity in this
domain, and identify research gaps in a sample of 100 studies conducted between 2010 and 2019.
We further review and analyse theoretical orientations, methodological concerns, reporting prac-
tices, and learning contexts that are found in recent thinking about L2 motivation.
Literature review
The development of L2 motivation theory
L2 motivation theory is concerned with persons’ choice making, the engagement in an action, the
persistence in the action, and the effort expended to attain success (Dörnyei and Ushioda 2011).
As Dörnyei and Ryan (2015) explain, ‘the ultimate aim of [L2] motivation research is always to
explain student learning’ (p. 101). Work in L2 motivation has documented a publication surge and
a changing landscape (see Boo, Dörnyei and Ryan 2015). Much significant work in this domain is cur-
rently being done as scholars in different world locations are exploring diverse motivational issues
such as group dynamics, teacher motivation, motivational strategies, demotivation, and complexity
theory among others. Ushioda (2013a) laments that motivation research has largely focused on what
and why questions, including: why do persons learn languages? What reasons hinder their motiv-
ation and why? Why are some students more motivated to learn the target language than
others? More recently, a new trend characterised as the ‘socio-dynamic’ (Dörnyei 2009) has fore-
grounded the dynamic nature of motivation. Within this new trend, a variety of motivational ques-
tions have sprung up, such as, how motivation develops and emerges in interaction with the ever-
changing context of language classrooms? How to design motivational teaching strategies and prac-
tices in the classroom? Within this socio-dynamic turn, ‘motivation is not seen as a static attribute of
the individual but rather as a dynamic factor that displays continuous fluctuation as it is adapted to
the ever-changing parameters of the context’ (Dörnyei and Ryan 2015: 84).
Dörnyei and Ryan’s (2015) stage framework has become a cornerstone for an understanding of
contemporary language motivation theory. In their stage framework, the authors characterise the
historical development of L2 motivation theory by identifying three stages: the social psychological
stage, the cognitive-situated stage, and the socio-dynamic stage. The first stage emphasised Gardner’s
work (1985, 2010) on the socio-educational model of second language acquisition and his associates
in the bilingual social context of Canada. Gardner’s theory includes the four key classes of complex
variables, each assessed with several scales: integrativeness (integrative orientation, attitudes toward
the second language community, and interest in foreign languages), attitudes toward the learning
situation (teacher evaluation and course evaluation), language anxiety (language class anxiety,
language use anxiety), and motivation (motivational intensity, desire to learn the language, and atti-
tudes toward learning the language). Sustained research conducted by Gardner and his colleagues
reported significant links between L2 achievement and these aggregate variables. Within his formal
model, L2 motivation is mediated by the three variables, namely, integrativeness, attitudes toward
the learning situation, and language anxiety. It is fair to say that research on the socio-educational
model has addressed diverse conceptual themes such as language achievement, drop-out vs. stay-in
students, bicultural excursion programmes, classroom behaviour, language retention, and so forth
(for a recent discussion, see Gardner 2019). On the whole, the socio-educational model contributed
to an understanding of the essence of motivation, conceptualisation of integrative motivation, the
integrative-instrumental motivation dichotomy, and a test battery for measuring motivational issues
(for an updated review, see Gardner 2020).
By the early 1990s, however, motivation scholars had begun to develop newer frameworks and
approaches to the study of L2 motivation. Explorations, for example, in World Englishes (WE)
THE LANGUAGE LEARNING JOURNAL 275
contexts, globalisation, global language identity development and critical citizenship education
made scholars rethink Gardner’s concept of integrativeness. Research conducted by Coetzee-Van
Rooy (2006), for instance, critiqued the untenability of Gardnerian integrative motivation and
demonstrated that ‘the notion of integrativeness is untenable for second-language learners in
world Englishes contexts’ (p. 447; see also Lamb 2004; McClelland 2000). Dörnyei and his associates
(Csizér and Dörnyei 2005; Dörnyei and Csizér 2002; Dörnyei, Csizér and Németh 2006) also found
that Gardner’s construct of integrativeness ‘may not so much be related to any actual, or metapho-
rical, integration into an L2 community as to some more basic identification process within the
individual’s self-concept’ (Dörnyei and Csizér 2002: 456). Thus, the type of identification
adopted in Dörnyei’s (2005, 2009) conceptualisation of language learning motivation relates to
‘a projected future image within the person’s self-concept, rather than identification with an exter-
nal reference group such as the L2 community as was the case with the notion integrativeness’
(Dörnyei 2020a: xx).
The cognitive-situated stage, during the 1990s, represented significant contributions from self-
determination theory and attribution theory. This stage saw the significance of the classroom learn-
ing situation, micro contextual and environmental influences, extrinsic and intrinsic motivations, and
the adoption of qualitative research approaches (Dörnyei and Ryan 2015). Although this flourishing
stage heavily relied on cognitive theories in mainstream educational psychology (i.e. non-L2-specific
research context), Al-Hoorie (2017) concludes that, ‘because this research has been so concerned
with classroom processes and with making motivation research more teacher-friendly—as
opposed to the focus on the larger picture in the social-psychological period—it might be appropri-
ate to describe this phase as the educational period’ (p. 3). Accordingly, the motivation research
agendas in the 1990s targeted themes of demotivation, teacher motivation, strategy use, self-
efficacy, emotion and personality, and willingness to communicate (Dörnyei 2001).
Finally, the current socio-dynamic stage, which started around the turn of the century, is charac-
terised by a focus on ‘motivational change/dynamism, self-regulation, imagined (possible) selves and
emergence of individual motivation in sociocultural contexts’ (Oxford 2020: 185). Proponents of this
research paradigm show an active and strong interest in motivational change, dynamicity and con-
tinuous fluctuation of motivation. Indeed, they seek to explain ‘how motivation emerges from inter-
action between individuals and contexts’ (Dörnyei and Ryan 2015: 74). In the first decade of the new
millennium, research on student motivation in mainstream educational psychology has been
informed by an orientation towards theories of self and identity, including but not limited to self-
determination, self-regulation, self-esteem, and self-efficacy (Leary 2007). Such concepts along
with emerging ideas from social psychology began to inform the field of L2 motivation studies.
In an attempt to reframe L2 motivation as part of the self-system, Dörnyei (2005, 2009) proposed a
new conceptualisation of language learning motivation, The L2 Motivational Self System, which is a
broad construct centring on persons’ future vision and image within their self-concept system. The
specific trigger for the formulation of the proposed model was to outline a synthesis of theoretical
frameworks of L2 motivation research. Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self System is made up of the
following three dimensions (Dörnyei 2009: 29):
1. Ideal L2 Self, which is the L2-specific facet of one’s ‘ideal self’: if the person we would like to
become speaks an L2, the ‘ideal L2 self’ is a powerful motivator to learn the L2 because of the
desire to reduce the discrepancy between our actual and ideal selves.
2. Ought-to L2 Self, which concerns the attributes that one believes one ought to possess to meet
expectations and to avoid possible negative outcomes.
3. L2 Learning Experience, which concerns situated, ‘executive’ motives related to the immediate
learning environment and experience (e.g. the impact of the teacher, the curriculum, the peer
group, the experience of success).
In developing the L2MSS model, Dörnyei draws on Markus and Nurius’s (1986) notion of possible
selves and Higgins’s (1987) self-discrepancy theory. Possible selves pertain to ‘how individuals think
about their potential and about their future. These possible selves are individualised or personalised,
but they are also distinctly social’ (Markus and Nurius 1986: 954).
L2 motivation studies
Over the past two decades there has been a great deal of research activity on second language learn-
ing motivation in different learning contexts. Since our study is a synthetic review, we do not intend
to summarise the empirical research conducted in this domain. Rather, we are interested in high-
lighting those studies that investigated motivation from ‘synthetic’ and ‘integrative’ perspectives.
Looking back, we can observe that the field of L2 motivation is in a state of development and expan-
sion as motivation scholars are exploring new strands of motivation research such as directed moti-
vational currents (Dörnyei et al. 2016; Henry, Davydenko and Dörnyei 2015), complexity theory
(Dörnyei, MacIntyre and Henry 2015; Hiver and Papi 2019), willingness to communicate (Khajavy
et al. 2016; Yashima, MacIntyre and Ikeda 2018), motivational group dynamics (Fukada et al. 2017;
Sasaki, Kozaki and Ross 2017), motivational teaching strategies (Alrabai 2016; Guilloteaux 2013),
motivation and project work (Muir 2020; Park and Hiver 2017), demotivation (Kikuchi 2015, 2017),
and motivation and multilingualism (Henry 2017; Ushioda 2019a), to name but a few.
While most of the studies reported in the literature have examined specific motivational issues,
only few studies attempted to provide a systematic and comprehensive picture of L2 motivation
research from 2010 to 2019, particularly from a synthetic lens. In one integrative study, Boo,
Dörnyei and Ryan (2015) reviewed a substantial pool of motivational studies (journal articles and
book chapters) published between 2005 and 2014 in terms of quantitative patters and theoreti-
cal-methodological developments. Their results indicated that the L2 motivation field has seen a
research methodological transformation over the past two decades and this relates to a diverse
range of qualitative research methods employed in ongoing research. In another study, Al-Hoorie
(2018) conducted a meta-analysis of the L2 motivational self system and found that the ideal L2
self, the ought-to L2 self, and the L2 learning experience could significantly predict the criterion vari-
able of intended effort. The author rebuked that L2 motivation research ‘has relied heavily on obser-
vational questionnaire-based research designs’ (p. 741) and argued for the need to conduct more
experimental research in this domain.
Significance of the study and research questions

As confirmed by Boo, Dörnyei and Ryan’s (2015) study, the number of research papers on L2 motiv-
ation has proliferated in recent years. This proliferation of studies has relied on the work from the
field of second language acquisition and motivation research in mainstream psychology, using
diverse theoretical frameworks, research methods, and other relevant orientations. Indeed, there is
a dearth of systematic reviews and synthetic reviews not only of language learning motivation in
general but of its methodological considerations and research characteristics in particular. There
have been several scoping reviews conducted to date in the SLA literature, including Visonà and Plons-
ky’s (2020) work on Arabic heritage language learning, Gurzynski-Weiss and Plonsky’s (2017) review of
interlocutor individual differences, and Tullock and Ortega’s (2017) review of study abroad reports. A
lack of systematic reviews alongside Visonà and Plonsky’s (2020) call for language-specific synthesis
triggered us to undertake a scoping review of L2 motivation research. By undertaking this synthetic
review, we attempt to marshal the findings and present an integrative synthesis of the research
areas under examination. We review the scope of empirical studies of L2 motivation, consider the
range and nature of research activity in this domain, and identify research gaps in a sample of 100
motivation studies conducted between 2010 and 2019. We further analyse theoretical approaches,
methodological features and characteristics, learning contexts, data collection instruments, and
reporting practices found in empirical research on L2 motivation. Accordingly, motivated by the

dearth of motivation-specific syntheses in the L2 field, we attempt to achieve a reframed understand-
ing of language learning motivation research and characterise its current research climate. In light of
these goals, we address the following research questions.
1. How do studies characterise and conceptualise language learning motivation?

2. What are the theoretical and analytical frameworks employed to explore L2 motivation?
3. What are the research methods and reporting practices used in motivation research?
4. What types of instruments and learning/research contexts are employed in motivation studies?
5. What areas constitute potential directions for future motivation research?
Methodology
Study identification and selection
In this review, we examined empirical research on language learning motivation from 2010 to 2019.
We consulted two applied linguists (one full professor and one associate professor) before collecting
data. Their recommendation was to select high-quality work published in peer-reviewed journals in
the field of applied linguistics. In doing so, we decided to conduct an in-depth ‘by-hand’ search of
the content of six high-ranking research journals: Applied Linguistics, TESOL Quarterly, The Modern
Language Journal, Language Teaching Research, Language Learning, and Studies in Second Language
Acquisition. All these journals publish work on L2 motivation and are indexed in Journal Citation
Reports. There are at least four reasons the selection of these databases: (i) they represent leading
journals in the L2 field and publish high-quality research articles on L2 motivation, (ii) they have
played an important part in the development of language learning motivation over the years, (iii)
since they maintain stringent standards in the publication process, their rigorousness enables us
to develop eligible criteria in our study, and (iv) having a wide potential audience, the journals
urge researchers to clearly demonstrate sound research methods and pedagogical implications of
their own studies. The latter was an important consideration to us because the results of our syn-
thetic review can inform a variety of audiences, including scholars and students in applied linguistics,
motivation scholars, and educational researchers. The searching process was done by analysing the
volumes and issues of the databases by year. Following a comprehensive search of studies in terms
of title, abstract, research question, and method, a total of 100 reports were obtained for the final
sample. Although the sample may not represent the broadening of L2 motivation research, it
attempts at least to take the motivational orientation forward and provide a synthetic picture of
current practices in this field.
Data collection
We developed a coding scheme to code the samples. The coding scheme enabled us to describe L2
motivation studies in terms of research paradigms, designs, instrumentation, theoretical approaches
and methodological features. The scheme also served as a guiding tool to code other substantive
elements such as characterisations and the operationalisation of L2 motivation, domain foci, unit
of analysis, and reporting practices. In creating the scheme we referred to coding practices in syn-
thetic research and scoping reviews (e.g. Arksey and O’Malley 2005; Gurzynski-Weiss and Plonsky
2017; Visonà and Plonsky 2020). Table 1 illustrates the coding scheme adopted in this synthetic
review. As it can be seen, it also includes items related to analysis and instrument types employed
in the samples. For the trustworthiness of the data, we invited a colleague with considerable experi-
ence in synthetic research to code a subset of the sample (35% or k = 35). Overall, agreement was
considered acceptable at 99.5%.
Table 1. Coding scheme for L2 motivation studies.

Variable Values
Bibliographic features
Author(s) Open
Year 2010–2019
Title Open
Publication type Journal article
Design and analysis features
Design Open
Comparison with different Yes
groups of learners (different
background)
Analysis type Quantitative Qualitative Mixed methods Innovative
approaches
Quantitative studies Standard Structural equation
inferential modelling
statistics
Qualitative Interviews Other (Open)
Research instrument Open
Learning context Foreign language Second language Study abroad
Research context Elementary Secondary University
Substantive features
Characterisation of L2 motivation Open
Theoretical approach The L2MSS Self-determination Attribution Person-in-context Other
model theory theory relational view (Open)
Level of analysis Learner Teacher Students with
disabilities
Reporting practice Research Piloting Reliability Effect size
question
Data analysis
We analysed the data in a relatively straightforward manner. Informed by previous scoping studies
and methodological syntheses (Marsden, Thompson and Plonsky 2018; Paquot and Plonsky 2017;
Visonà and Plonsky 2020), we calculated frequencies and percentages for the values of the features
related to each research questions. The following section presents the results of quantitative analysis
and qualitative findings relating to research questions. The ‘open’ fields of the coding scheme refer
to the values that we believed require flexibility and variability. Indeed, this allowed for inclusion of
studies with regard to definitions of ‘L2 motivation’, analysis type, type of research instrument, and
other substantive features.
Results
In the following section, we apply synthetic research techniques to the area of L2 motivation
research. First, we provide an overview of the motivation studies collected and coded in the
review and then answer each research question in turn. As Table 2 shows, the final study sample
is composed of 100 articles from six major applied linguistics journals (see the Appendix).
Table 2. Journals where studies of L2 motivation appear.

Journal Ka
Applied Linguistics 7
TESOL Quarterly 18
The Modern Language Journal 39
Language Teaching Research 19
Language Learning 11
Studies in Second Language Acquisition 6
a
K = number of study reports.
These are leading journals in the field that publish a variety of publications and types of research (e.g.
experimental, meta-analytic) on L2 motivation. The journals are also flexible, allowing researchers to
employ diverse theoretical approaches to motivation in their own studies.
RQ1: Characterising ‘language learning motivation’

The first research question addressed how studies characterise and conceptualise ‘motivation’. We
found that interest in ‘language learning motivation’ is growing (See Figure 1). Ninety-four of the
100 studies (94%) were explicitly empirical, exploring a variety of concepts such as ‘the ideal L2
self’, ‘the ought-to L2 self’, ‘the L2 learning experience’, and ‘motivational dynamics’. However, the
remaining six studies (6%) were theoretical reviews dealing with novel issues as varied as ‘the motiv-
ation to learn languages other than English (LOTEs)’, ‘unconscious motivation’, ‘the ideal multilingual
self’, and ‘the L2 motivation landscape in the United Kingdom’. While the studies addressed
language learning motivation in different world locations, we were able to code the samples in
terms of ‘focus of definition’ and ‘epistemological orientation’. Interestingly, in the coding process
we discovered that recent theorising on L2 motivation is breaking new ground and expanding
beyond well-established areas set by both the social psychological tradition and the cognitive-situ-
ated period. This orientation indicates that the focus of definition in recent L2 motivation research is
being informed by a ‘socio-dynamic’ perspective. Within this perspective, ‘motivation is not seen as a
static attribute of the individual but rather as a dynamic factor that displays continuous fluctuation as
it is adapted to the ever-changing parameters of the context’ (Dörnyei and Ryan 2015: 84). Our
coding process further showed that 39 of the empirical studies (42%) drew upon Dörnyei’s (2005,
2009) socio-dynamically informed conceptualisation of L2 motivation in terms of future self-
guides and the role played by vision and imagination. Recent studies by Dörnyei and Chan (2013)
on imagery capacity and by Waninge et al. (2014) on motivational dynamics of language learners,
as well as the a special issue of The Modern Language Journal on motivation to learn LOTEs in a multi-
cultural world, by definition, suggest that a reframed understanding of ‘motivation’ may potentially
provide greater insights into the dynamic complexity of language learning motivation.
As can be seen in Figure 1, recent years of 2017 (k = 24), 2018 (k = 15), and 2019 (k = 14) have wit-
nessed a growing interest in the topic of motivation. It is noteworthy that nearly 40% of the work has
Figure 1. Number of motivation study reports published by year, from 2010 to 2019.
appeared in The Modern Language Journal within the last 10 years alone. Journals such as Language
Teaching Research (19%), TESOL Quarterly (18%), Language Learning (11%), Applied Linguistics (7%),
and Studies in Second Language Acquisition (6%) were active in publishing motivation-related
issues as well.
Epistemologically, the field of L2 motivation research is in a state of expansion and develop-
ment, as characterised by diverse theoretical concepts, participants, learning-research contexts,
and methodological innovation. Studies in our sample alluded to this epistemological orien-
tation, particularly in terms of the growth of mixed methods research, the rise of qualitative
research, the deployment of innovative practices (e.g. retrodictive qualitative modelling), and
the appearance of ‘complex dynamic systems theory’ in L2 motivation research landscape.
Overall, this result indicates that L2 motivation research is in line with a dynamic paradigm
shift in the second language acquisition community, entering new phases of refinement and
application.
In terms of the unit of analysis, we also noticed that despite various calls in the literature for a
greater awareness of teacher motivation (Dörnyei and Ryan 2015), only 12% of the studies were con-
ducted in this domain. Moreover, our analysis highlighted that an under-studied area in the collected
sample is research on students with disabilities as only one single publication tapped into this issue.
Figure 2 captures the unit of analysis in the recent scholarship on motivation.
RQ2: Theoretical frameworks employed in L2 motivation studies

Our second research question was concerned with the theoretical and analytical frameworks being
applied in the sample. Informed by mainstream educational psychology and L2 motivation theory,
we coded our database based on nine frameworks: the L2 motivational self system (L2MSS) model,
the person-in-context relational (PCR) model, self-determination theory (SDT), attribution theory
(AT), the socio-educational model (SEM), willingness to communicate (WTC), self-efficacy theory
(SET), motivational dynamics utilising complex dynamic systems theory (CDST), and goal-setting
theory (GST). We found that ‘the L2MSS model’ is the most common model of learner motivation.
Of the total output in our dataset, 42% of the work drew centrally on Dörnyei’s (2005, 2009)
L2MSS, followed by self-determination theory (k = 18) and the person-in-context relational model
(k = 9). The least common were the publications involving goal-setting theory (k = 4) and self-
efficacy theory (k = 2). Figure 3 provides a frequency diagram of the dominance of frameworks par-
ticularly used in L2 motivation research.
Figure 2. Unit of analysis in L2 motivation research.

Figure 3. Division of motivation studies by type of theoretical framework.
RQ3: Research methods and reporting practices

Our third research question is of great importance as we examined the research methodological
base of language learning motivation in applied linguistics research. In order to provide a holistic
synthetic account of methodological characteristics, we decided to employ Boo, Dörnyei and
Ryan’s (2015) framework to delineate the domain of research methodological practices, data collec-
tion instruments, and learning/research contexts used primarily in conceptualisations of motivation.
Of the 94 empirical studies in our sample, 48 were grounded in quantitative research methods, 21
were qualitative studies, 22 used mixed methods research designs, and three adopted innovative
research approaches (see Figure 4). Innovative approaches are a range of novel procedures, both
qualitative and quantitative, such as Q methodology, the idiodynamic method or retrodictive quali-
tative modelling (see Dörnyei 2020b). In order to provide a situated understanding of the nature of
the research methodological base of L2 motivation research, we relied on Boo, Dörnyei and Ryan’s
Figure 4. Types of research methods used in motivation study reports.

(2015: 151–152) classification of research methodologies. We divided quantitative research methods

into two types: studies employing (a) standard inferential statistics such as t-tests, correlations and
ANOVA, and (b) structural equation modelling (SEM). Equally, we divided qualitative studies into
‘Interviews’ (including both individual and focus group) and ‘Other qualitative approaches’ (e.g.
different forms of observation and interaction analysis). As Figure 4 demonstrates, 31 used standard
inferential statistics, 17 applied structural equation modelling, 14 conducted interviews, and seven
drew on other types of qualitative approaches. We will further elaborate on these methodological
aspects in the discussion section of this review.
Following Derrick (2016) and Plonsky’s (2013, 2014) calls for methodological quality in L2
research, we were motivated to assess reporting practices in publications on L2 motivation. As
Derrick (2016: 132) demonstrated, reporting practices should be clear and transparent, carrying
information about ‘the origins, development, piloting, and reliability of instruments as well as infor-
mation about inter-rater reliability’. Bearing these considerations in mind, we assessed the extent to
which four reporting practices are found in L2 motivation studies: (a) the reporting of research ques-
tions or hypotheses, (b) the piloting of instruments, (c) reliability estimates, and (c) the reporting of
effect size (i.e. the magnitude of a result). As is normal in L2 motivation research, research questions
were found in nearly all studies (k = 78, 82%). 48% (k = 46) of the instruments provided information
about the piloting phases of research. As to reliability estimates, fifty-six percent (k = 53) of the instru-
ments were accompanied by information related to reliability coefficients. However, the same level
of transparency was not observed for the category of effect sizes (29%), which carries important
implications for the reproducibility, interpretability, and meta-analysability of research findings in
this domain.
RQ 4: Instruments and learning/research contexts

Regarding the type of instruments utilised to examine L2 motivation variables, studies in the dataset
encompassed a range of research instruments drawn from established procedures in the L2 motiv-
ation field and mainstream psychological research on motivation. The most frequently used type of
instrument was self-report measures (questionnaire and interview) tapping into learners’ motivation.
Additionally, the studies applied a series of tests and tasks, observations, and reflective journals for
the purposes of learner engagement.
As to learning contexts, we grouped the data under three categories: foreign language, second
language, and study abroad, as shown in Figure 5. Our data revealed that the most common type
Figure 5. Division of motivation studies by learning context.

Figure 6. Division of motivation studies by research context.
was foreign language, with 63 studies, followed by L2 at 29 studies, and two studies took place in
study-abroad contexts. In terms of research contexts, the most common type was conducted in uni-
versity context (k = 66), as shown in Figure 6. The second most common type of research context was
in secondary classrooms at 27 studies, followed by one study in elementary schools. Overall, this
result indicates that recent research has focused on the maintenance of learners’ motivation at ter-
tiary settings.
RQ 5: Directions for future motivation research

Our final research question of this review relates to motivational areas for future research. As we
moved back and forth between the motivation studies, we identified five areas needing well-
informed attention in this domain: ‘motivational group dynamics’, ‘task motivation’, ‘language
teacher motivation’, ‘technology and motivation’, and ‘the L2 motivation of students with disabil-
ities’. These themes are addressed below.
Discussion and conclusions

In this synthesis, we were interested in offering an integrative understanding of the existing state of
research on the topic of L2 motivation. For this purpose, we applied a synthetic approach to examine
the growing body of work on L2 motivation research. We examined the recent characterisation of
language learning motivation, theoretical approaches, data collection methods, and learning-
research contexts used primarily in this growing domain. We also identified several areas worthy
of investigation in future research. In the rest of this paper we discuss and synthesise the findings
of our review in light the research questions guiding this work: characterising the recent scholarship
on L2 motivation, identifying theoretical frameworks and approaches, examining methodological
characteristics, and identifying gaps and current trends.
In order to approach these goals, this synthetic review systematically searched the literature on
motivational issues from seven leading applied linguistics journals. In total, 94 empirical studies and
six conceptual reviews (k = 100) were identified and met our criteria. Although it was not our goal to
find conclusive answers or closure to this domain, the results not only extend the horizons in L2
motivation but also are of relevance to future empirical explorations and could inform the L2 motiv-
ation research community of the importance of paying attention to the features highlighted in this
review.
The picture that the current thinking paints of L2 motivation research is complex and multifa-
ceted, as represented in this review. The results indicated that the character of L2 motivation is shift-
ing as scholars in different world locations are exploring motivational phenomena from various
epistemological and operational perspectives. We found that the changing face of L2 motivation
research in recent years not only lies in diversification and expansion of research trends but also per-
tains to educational policies and pedagogical practices seeking to prepare motivated language lear-
ners and teachers (Ushioda 2013b). In addition, this large and growing interest in the area of L2
motivation can be attributed to the challenges posed by globalisation. Globalisation, through its
various construals (e.g. educational, cultural, political), has made scholars rethink the assumptions
and objectives of English language teaching. Advocating a critical perspective on globalisation
and English language education, Kumaravadivelu (2012) argues convincingly that the ongoing cul-
tural globalisation is impacting on students and their identities:
Cultural globalization is shaping the global flows of cultural capital, interested knowledge, and identity for-
mation. Cultures are in closer contact now than ever before, and are influencing each other in complex and com-
plicated ways. This development is creating a global cultural consciousness, and along with it, creative and
chaotic tensions that both unite and divide people (p. 4).
Taking ‘the local teaching-learning context’ as a point of departure for reflecting on motivation,
Ushioda (2013b) also acknowledges that the ongoing expansion of interest in language learning
motivation is shaped and driven by ‘local practical concerns’ (p. 2). In addition to globalisation,
we can make the point that emerging issues such as the World Englishes paradigm, the global
spread of English as an international language, and multilingualism have invited a re-visioning of
policies and practices of language pedagogy.
This review highlighted that the L2 motivation field is entering new phases of expansion and
development, as reflected by an emerging interest in socio-dynamic perspectives and the framework
of CDST. Motivation research agendas employing a CDST perspective have ‘foregrounded the under-
standing of time scales and change patterns’ (Dörnyei 2020b: 10). Highlighting the dynamic character
and temporal variation of the concept of motivation (see Dörnyei and Ryan 2015), a CDST perspective
is useful in that,
It will shed new light on such interacting phenomena, explaining certain observations that simply do not make
sense when examined within a linear, cause– effect framework. L2 development is always a function of several
interfering factors, and CDST can in principle handle multiple variables as they interact with each other (Dörnyei
2020b: 43).
This finding indicates that recent scholarship on L2 motivation has characterised the construct from
diverse theoretical orientations and epistemologies, particularly by an orientation towards interdis-
ciplinarity. The results suggested that a wide range of concepts and variables are currently being
investigated in the study of motivation. The current climate is highly favourable as motivation
research agendas feature topics beyond integrative-instrumental and intrinsic-extrinsic motivations,
such as motivational dynamics, strategy use in academic writing, demotivation and remotivation,
teacher motivational practice, emotional experience, etc.
In relation to the conceptualisation in recent thinking, it is our belief that looking at motivational
issues from the perspective of ‘the Global South’ could valuably extend and expand shifting horizons
in L2 motivation. Global South perspectives ‘are encapsulated in struggles for basic, economic, politi-
cal, and social transformation in an inequitable world, and are not confined to the geographical South’
(Pennycook and Makoni 2020: i). Descriptive statistics show that 53% of the work took place in Asian
context (such as china, Japan, Saudi Arabia), 25% in Europe, 21% in North America, and 1% in South
America. We found no studies in Australia and the African continent. Therefore, by embracing
southern contexts, future scholarship can challenge mainstream motivation perspectives and
reveal topics occluded from exploration in the L2 motivation field. Potential topics for research are
sexuality, gender, class, poverty, inequality, race, and other sociopolitical orientations.
One of the most notable findings from our review is the diversity and multiplicity in the theoreti-
cal approaches, research methodologies, and constructs identified in the empirical studies. The
examination of theoretical approaches revealed that Dörnyei’s (2005, 2009) L2 motivational self
system is the leading motivational framework compared to other approaches such as self-determi-
nation theory, as shown by Csizér (2019) review of this model. The results of the current review
suggested that the majority of the studies (k = 39) drew upon the L2MSS model. One explanation
for the active and strong interest in this model in recent years is partly because it is generally an inte-
grative synthesis of previous motivational constructs and approaches, and partly because over the
last decade it has been successfully deployed in various language learning environments (see You
and Dörnyei 2016), such as Hungary (Csizér and Tankó 2017), Germany (Busse 2013), Spain (Doiz
and Lasagabaster 2018), Sweden (Henry 2010), China (You and Dörnyei 2016), Japan (Saito et al.
2018), Iran (Papi and Abdollahzadeh 2012), and Pakistan (Islam, Lamb and Chambers 2013).
Recent overview of the L2MSS model by Csizér’s (2019) not only confirms that this model has
been employed in countless empirical studies but also explains the extraordinary interest in the
model: ‘In my view, the fact that the L2MSS has become a prominent theory in the field of
L2 motivation is largely due to two facts: its simplicity and adaptability to different contexts’.
The review also revealed that recent L2 motivation research draws on multiple motivation the-
ories to capture various motivational processes, such as self-determination theory, attribution
theory, the socio-educational model, willingness to communicate, self-efficacy theory, motivational
dynamics utilising CDST, and goal-setting theory. Despite the fact that the studies used these frame-
works either independently or in combination, the key point is that the L2MSS and its related con-
structs are dominating the field and providing fertile ground for innovation and reflection. Boo,
Dörnyei and Ryan’s (2015: 153) synthetic review usefully summarises the issue:
We may speculate therefore that a factor underlying both the theoretical shift towards the L2MSS and the
observed research boom is related to the versatility of the L2MSS framework: it not only allowed for the engage-
ment with existing theories and methods on their own terms but it also offered a springboard for new
approaches.
Methodologically, the findings show that although quantitative research methods are widely used in
the sample, there is a growing increase of qualitative methods in the surveyed period, whether
employed independently or in combination with mixed-methods research designs. This finding cor-
responds with Boo, Dörnyei and Ryan’s (2015) systematic literature survey which concluded that
‘although quantitative research utilising traditional statistical measurement has remained the
most popular choice, the dominance of the quantitative paradigm has disappeared and a variety
of qualitative and innovative research methods has been increasingly endorsed in L2 motivation
research’. It is astonishing to note that the rise of qualitative methods of inquiry (k = 21) as well as
mixed methods research designs (k = 22) not only help provide more coherent and robust accounts
of motivational processes, but also accord with the recent paradigms shift to these approaches.
Advocating qualitative approaches to theorising and researching L2 motivation, Ushioda (2019b)
urges motivational scholars to take advantage of qualitative methodology because,
Qualitative research on L2 motivation thus facilitates a holistic perspective on the lived experience of language
learners as people located in specific socio- historical as well as cultural and physical contexts, who have
complex social and personal histories contributing to their current motivations and aspirations for the future
(p. 667).
In relation to reporting practices, we found that while studies within the sample included clear and
thorough information about the inclusion of research questions or hypotheses, piloting process, and
estimates of reliability, there is room for improvement in this domain. Specifically, the finding in this
section suggested the need for the reporting of effect sizes in research on L2 motivation. As empha-
sised by Plonsky (2013), effect sizes are of critical importance, facilitating the interpretation of
research findings. Since the field of L2 motivation research has a variety of audiences, consumers
(teachers, students, researchers) can benefit from reporting effect sizes in the analysis and
interpretation of research results. Moreover, the reporting of effect size or estimates contribute sub-
stantially to future meta-analysts interested in providing an organised understanding of the effec-
tiveness of L2 motivation on language learning. Therefore, researchers should provide thorough
information about the instruments employed in their own studies. This transparency in reporting
is needed ‘for interpreting study results, conducting replications, forming and modifying L2
theory, and performing meta-analytic research’ (Derrick 2016: 132).
Our analysis also suggested that the most commonly used tools in qualitative investigations of L2
motivation were interview-based (k = 14), which explored participants’ subjective accounts of self
and identities. It is fairly safe to conclude that since motivation is not directly observable, qualitative
inquiry ‘allows for the possibility of understanding people’s motivations and behaviours as these
emerge in dynamic interaction with local social and contextual processes, and (importantly) as
people engage with and shape these evolving contextual and relational processes through their
own reflexivity and agency’ (Ushioda 2019b: 668). In short, in accordance with recent proposals
for moving away from reliance on self-report data (e.g. Ushioda 2020: 666) more qualitative research
on L2 motivation is needed to enable a grounded and detailed focus on students, their motivational
tendencies, subjective experiences, and ‘local individual realities and perspectives’ (p. 666).
As stated above, the current trend in recent L2 motivation discourse is studying motivation as a set
of complex, dynamic, and changing phenomena emerging in context (Dörnyei, MacIntyre and Henry
2015), typically using a wide range of methods and frameworks. In this review, we found that since the
publication of Dörnyei et al.’s (2015) anthology which presented an extensive discussion of dynamic
systems theory in the study of motivation, studies in the sample applied ‘innovative’ approaches (both
qualitative and quantitative) to L2 motivation. This is promising news that the motivational literature
has recognised the importance of innovative research practices (Dörnyei 2014b; Hiver 2017; Poupore
2018). For example, the use of ‘retrodictive qualitative modeling’ as a qualitative method for research-
ing complexity theory (for an outstanding volume, see Hiver and Al-Hoorie 2020) offers the advantage
that it ‘takes the complex system’s observable end state as the starting-point for analysis, and works
backwards or retrodictively from this to understand the dynamics of how and why various system
components have ended up in this end state’ (Ushioda 2020: 201). Our findings imply that future
research is needed to provide greater insights into the addition of further innovative methods
(such as Q methodology, idiodynamics) for data collection and analysis in this area.
Furthermore, the dominance of foreign language learning contexts (k = 63) and L2 environments
(k = 29), taken together with the lack of study-abroad research (k = 2) signals that the current
research could benefit from a greater use of study-abroad perspectives. The study abroad experi-
ences offer advantages in exploring possible trajectories learners may lie on, as Nitta and Baba
(2015) concluded in their study: ‘perhaps the most pressing need is for those involved in designing
study abroad programmes to pay greater attention to the management of expectations and goal-
setting strategies of learners going to study abroad, perhaps at the pre-departure preparation
stage’ (p. 358). By integrating study abroad perspectives into L2 motivation research, future
studies can provide a more detailed, contextualised, and nuanced picture of learner motivation
and patterns of change, ‘one that more fully captures its volatility and vitality’ (Nitta and Baba
2015: 356). As to research context, the majority of the studies took place in university contexts (k
= 53) and the context of secondary school (k = 53), taken together with the lack of studies in elemen-
tary schools (k = 1). It might be correct to say that since studies drew mainly on the L2MSS model,
some bias might have crept in the motivational literature as regards to the participant (EFL individ-
uals), context (EFL classrooms), and target language (English). While these perceived gaps are
addressed in a recent study conducted by Thompson and Vásquez (2015), it appears that more
research in the context of elementary school is certainly needed as student self-concept changes
during elementary years.
Finally, based on our analysis of the sample, we identified several research trends that merit well-
informed attention in the future L2 motivation scholarship. These motivational strands are addressed
below briefly.
Motivational group dynamics

Despite limited research activities (e.g. Chang 2010; Poupore 2018), there is a lack of research on
group work dynamics within the ten-year period we surveyed. Following Dörnyei (2007: 720) that
‘the quality of teaching and learning is entirely different depending on whether the classroom is
characterised by a climate of trust and support or by a competitive, cutthroat atmosphere’, it
appears that student interaction and classroom climate are important considerations in supporting
the student motivation. Future research should investigate motivational group dynamics further.
Task motivation
Since language learners engage in a number of tasks and activities to develop their language ability,
task motivation is of crucial importance. As suggested by recent studies, language learning tasks
which are ‘goal-oriented activities that people undertake and that involve meaningful use of
language’ (Van den Branden 2016: 240), can foster learning and provide ample opportunities for
practice and consolidation (for a useful discussion, see Kormos and Wilby 2019). Additional research
is needed to examine diverse dimensions and characteristics of tasks (e.g. task ownership, task inno-
vativeness) and explain what makes L2 takes engaging and motivating.
Language teacher motivation

Based on our results of this synthetic review, we rebuke the recent research for its insufficient
exploration of language teacher motivation and for considerable focus on L2 learners. We noticed
in the sample that the ‘unit of analysis’ of such research has predominately been the L2 learner,
which left little room for the teachers in most cases. Despite the recent interest in this area (e.g.
Hiver, Kim and Kim 2018; Kubanyiova 2019), we call for further research effort to update our knowl-
edge of the dynamics of teacher motivation.
Technology and motivation

The lack of research in the application of technology to L2 motivation indicates the need for much
more focused research in this area (Henry and Lamb 2019). Empirical studies need to further explore
the motivational potentials of digital technologies and examine how leaner motivation arises
through interactions with these technologies.
The L2 motivation of students with disabilities

A further criticism with the L2 motivation research field is that it has neglected students with learning
disabilities. The limited research output in this area in our sample leads us to call for more consistent
research on deaf and hard-of-hearing foreign language learners, which can give us a better under-
standing of their self-efficacy beliefs in the L2 learning (see Kontra 2020, also Csizér and Kontra 2020).
Limitations and directions for future research

There are several limitations to the current synthetic review. One limitation pertains to the dataset (k
= 100) we selected for analysis. Our dataset was confined to six applied linguistics journals. Such
limited coverage fails to do justice to the multifaceted nature and context of motivation. Future
reviews are advised to include larger number of journals, including Scopus-ranked journals which
we excluded in this synthesis. A further limitation of our review is concerned with exclusion of
book chapters and dissertations. We suggest future researchers to capitalise on such corpora if
they intend to provide novel insights into language motivation. For instance, research can take
into account a number of book chapters and edited volumes and anthologies in order to provide a
complete dataset of the literature on motivation. The third notable limitation is related to the eligi-
bility criteria we developed in the reviewing process, particularly in relation to instrument reporting
practices. We urge researchers to explore different instrument reporting practices employed in L2
motivation studies, in both descriptive (e.g. sample size, mean, confidence interval) and inferential
statistics (e.g. χ2, t test without mean, p value). To conclude, we hope that our findings can reflect
a useful macro picture of the ever-changing landscape of L2 motivation research. We can addition-
ally hope that research on this topic within the field of SLA continues to contribute to our under-
standing of the conceptualisation of motivation and other motivational matters.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the esteemed editors of the journal and the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful
comments throughout the revision process. We would also like to thank Sukanya Radhakrishnan, Production Editor
of the journal, for her assistance during the production process.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
ORCID
Mohammad Hadi Mahmoodi http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2155-2387
Moslem Yousefi http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0435-5805
References
Acheson, K., J. Taylor and K. Luna. 2016. The burnout spiral: the emotion labor of five rural US foreign language teachers.
The Modern Language Journal 100, no.2: 522–537.
Al-Hoorie, A. 2017. Sixty years of language motivation research: looking back and looking forward. SAGE Open 7, no. 1:
1–11.
Al-Hoorie, A.H. 2018. The L2 motivational self system: a meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching
8, no. 4: 721–54.
Al-Murtadha, M. 2019. Enhancing EFL learners’ willingness to communicate with visualization and goal-setting activities.
TESOL Quarterly 53, no. 1: 133–157.
Alrabai, F. 2016. The effects of teachers’ in-class motivational intervention on learners’ EFL achievement. Applied
Linguistics 37, no. 3: 307–33.
Arksey, H. and L. O’Malley. 2005. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social
Research Methodology 8, no. 1: 19–32.
Aubrey, S. 2017. Inter-cultural contact and flow in a task-based Japanese EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research 21,
no. 6: 717–734.
Boo, Z., Z. Dörnyei and S. Ryan. 2015. L2 motivation research 2005–2014: understanding a publication surge and a chan-
ging landscape. System 55: 145–57.
Borg, S. and Y. Alshumaimeri. 2019. Language learner autonomy in a tertiary context: teachers’ beliefs and practices.
Language Teaching Research 23, no. 1: 9–38.
Busse, V. 2013. An exploration of motivation and self-beliefs of first year students of German. System 41, no. 2: 379–98.
Busse, V. 2017. Plurilingualism in Europe: exploring attitudes toward English and other European languages among ado-
lescents in Bulgaria, Germany, the Netherlands, and Spain. The Modern Language Journal 101, no. 3: 566–82.
Busse, V. and C. Walter. 2013. Foreign language learning motivation in higher education: a longitudinal study of moti-
vational changes and their causes. The Modern Language Journal 97, no. 2: 435–456.
Butler, Y.G. 2017. Motivational elements of digital instructional games: a study of young L2 learners’ game designs.
Language Teaching Research 21, no. 6: 735–750.
Cao, Y. 2014. A sociocognitive perspective on second language classroom willingness to communicate. TESOL Quarterly
48, no. 4, 789–814.
Chang, L.Y.H. 2010. Group processes and EFL learners’ motivation: a study of group dynamics in EFL classrooms. TESOL
Quarterly 44, no. 1: 129–54.
Cho, M. 2018. Task complexity and modality: exploring learners’ experience from the perspective of flow. The Modern
Language Journal 102, no. 1: 162–180.
Chow, B.W.Y., H.T. Chiu and S.W. Wong. 2018. Anxiety in reading and listening English as a foreign language in Chinese
undergraduate students. Language Teaching Research 22, no. 6: 719–738.
Cheng, L., D. Klinger, J. Fox, C. Doe, Y. Jin and Wu, J. 2014. Motivation and test anxiety in test performance across three
testing contexts: the CAEL, CET, and GEPT. TESOL Quarterly 48 no. 2: 300–330.
Claro, J. 2020. Identification with external and internal referents: integrativeness and the ideal L2 self. In Contemporary
Language Motivation Theory: 60 Years Since Gardner and Lambert (1959), ed. A.H. Al-Hoorie and P.D. MacIntyre, 233–
61. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Coetzee-Van Rooy, S. 2006. Integrativeness: untenable for world Englishes learners? World Englishes 25, no. 3–4: 437–50.
Csizér, K. 2019. The L2 motivational self system. In Palgrave Handbook of Motivation for Language Learning, ed. M. Lamb,
K. Csizér, A. Henry and S. Ryan, 71–93. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Csizér, K. and Z. Dörnyei. 2005. The internal structure of language learning motivation and its relationship with language
choice and learning effort. The Modern Language Journal 89, no. 1: 19–36.
Csizér, K. and E.H. Kontra. 2020. Foreign language learning characteristics of deaf and severely hard-of-hearing students.
The Modern Language Journal 104, no. 1: 233–49.
Csizér, K., J. Kormos and A. Sarkadi. 2010. The dynamics of language learning attitudes and motivation: lessons from an
interview study of dyslexic language learners. The Modern Language Journal 94, no. 3: 470–487.
Csizér, K. and G. Tankó. 2017. English majors’ self-regulatory control strategy use in academic writing and its relation to
L2 motivation. Applied Linguistics 38, no. 3: 386–404.
Derrick, D.J. 2016. Instrument reporting practices in second language research. TESOL Quarterly 50, no. 1: 132–53.
Doiz, A. and D. Lasagabaster. 2018. Teachers’ and students’ second language motivational self system in English-
medium instruction: A qualitative approach. TESOL Quarterly 52, no. 3: 657–79.
Dörnyei, Z. 1994. Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom. Modern Language Journal 78: 273–84.
Dörnyei, Z. 2001. New themes and approaches in second language motivation research. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics 21: 43–59.
Dörnyei, Z. 2005. The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dörnyei, Z. 2007. Creating a motivating classroom environment. In International Handbook of English Language Teaching
(Vol. 2), ed. J. Cummins and C. Davison, 719–31. New York, NY: Springer.
Dörnyei, Z. 2009. The L2 motivational self system. In Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self, ed. Z. Dörnyei and E.
Ushioda, 9–42. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Dörnyei, Z. 2014a. Future self-guides and vision. In The Impact of Self-Concept on Language Learning, ed. K. Csizér and M.
Magid, 7–18. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Dörnyei, Z. 2014b. Researching complex dynamic systems: retrodictive qualitative modelling in the language classroom.
Language Teaching 47, no. 1: 80–91.
Dörnyei, Z. 2019. Task motivation: what makes an L2 task engaging? In Researching L2 Task Performance and Pedagogy:
In Honour of Peter Skehan, ed. Z. Wen and M.J. Ahmadian, 53–66. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Dörnyei, Z. 2020a. Foreword. In Contemporary Language Motivation Theory: 60 Years Since Gardner and Lambert (1959),
ed. A. Al-Hoorie and P.D. MacIntyre, xix–xxii. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Dörnyei, Z. 2020b. Innovations and Challenges in Language Learning Motivation. New York, NY: Routledge.
Dörnyei, Z. and A.H. Al-Hoorie. 2017. The motivational foundation of learning languages other than Global English:
theoretical issues and research directions. The Modern Language Journal 101, no.3: 455–468.
Dörnyei, Z. and L. Chan. 2013. Motivation and vision: an analysis of future L2 self images, sensory styles, and imagery
capacity across two target languages. Language Learning 63, no. 3: 437–62.
Dörnyei, Z. and K. Csizér. 2002. Some dynamics of language attitudes and motivation: results of a longitudinal nation-
wide survey. Applied Linguistics 23: 421–62.
Dörnyei, Z. and M. Kubanyiova. 2014. Motivating Learners, Motivating Teachers: Building Vision in the Language
Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. and S. Ryan. 2015. The Psychology of the Language Learner Revisited. New York: Routledge.
Dörnyei, Z. and E. Ushioda. 2011. Teaching and Researching Motivation, 2nd ed. Harlow: Longman.
Dörnyei, Z., K. Csizér and N. Németh. 2006. Motivation, Language Attitudes, and Globalization: A Hungarian Perspective.
Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Dörnyei, Z., P.D. MacIntyre and A. Henry, eds. 2015. Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning. Bristol, England:
Multilingual Matters.
Dörnyei, Z., A. Henry and C. Muir. 2016. Motivational Currents in Language Learning: Frameworks for Focused
Interventions. New York: Routledge.
Doucerain, M. M. 2019. L2 experience mediates the relation between mainstream acculturation orientation and self-
assessed L2 competence among migrants. Applied Linguistics 40, no. 2: 355–378.
Erler, L. and E. Macaro. 2011. Decoding ability in French as a foreign language and language learning motivation. The
Modern Language Journal 95, no. 4: 496–518.
Foster, P., Bolibaugh, C. and Kotula, A. 2014. Knowledge of nativelike selections in a L2: the influence of exposure,
memory, age of onset, and motivation in foreign language and immersion settings. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition 36, no. 1: 101–132.
Fox, J., L. Cheng and B.D. Zumbo. 2014. Do they make a difference? the impact of English language programs on second
language students in Canadian universities. TESOL Quarterly 48, no. 1: 57–85.
Freiermuth, M.R. and H.C Huang. 2012. Bringing Japan and Taiwan closer electronically: a look at an intercultural online
synchronic chat task and its effect on motivation. Language Teaching Research 16, no.1: 61–88.
Fukada, Y., T. Murphey, J. Falout and T. Fukuda. 2017. Essential motivational group dynamics: a 3-year panel study. In
Essential Competencies for English-Medium University Teaching, ed. R. Breeze and C.S. Guinda, 249–66. Switzerland:
Springer.
Gao, X. and H. Xu. 2014. The dilemma of being English language teachers: interpreting teachers’ motivation to teach,
and professional commitment in China’s hinterland regions. Language Teaching Research 18, no. 2: 152–168.
Fushino, K. 2010. Causal relationships between communication confidence, beliefs about group work, and willingness
to communicate in foreign language group work. TESOL Quarterly 44, no. 4: 700–724.
Gan, Z., C. Leung, J. He and H. Nang. 2018. Classroom assessment practices and learning motivation: a case study of
Chinese EFL students. TESOL Quarterly 53, no. 2: 514–529.
Gardner, R.C. 1985. Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes and Motivation. London,
England: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R.C. 2010. Motivation and Second Language Acquisition: The Socio-Educational Model. New York: Peter Lang
Publishing.
Gardner, R.C. 2019. The socio-educational model of second language acquisition. In Palgrave Handbook of Motivation for
Language Learning, ed. M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry and S. Ryan, 21–37. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gardner, R.C. 2020. Looking back and looking forward. In Contemporary Language Motivation Theory: 60 Years Since
Gardner and Lambert (1959), ed. A.H. Al-Hoorie and P.D. MacIntyre, 5–14. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Guilloteaux, M.-J. 2013. Motivational strategies for the language classroom: perceptions of Korean secondary school
English teachers. System 41, no. 1: 3–14.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. and L. Plonsky. 2017. Look who’s interacting: a scoping review of research involving non-teacher/
non-peer interlocutors. In Expanding Individual Difference Research in the Interaction Approach: Investigating
Learners, Instructors, and Other Interlocutors, ed. L. Gurzynski-Weiss, 305–24. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Henry, A. 2010. Contexts of possibility in simultaneous language learning: using the L2 motivational self system to
assess the impact of global English. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 31, no. 2: 149–62.
Henry, A. 2017. L2 motivation and multilingual identities. The Modern Language Journal 101: 548–65.
Henry, A. 2019. Online media creation and L2 motivation: a socially situated perspective. TESOL Quarterly 53, no. 2: 372–
404.
Henry, A. and C. Cliffordson. 2013. Motivation, gender, and possible selves. Language Learning 63, no. 2: 271–295.
Henry, A. and C. Cliffordson. 2017. The impact of out-of-school factors on motivation to learn English: self-discrepancies,
beliefs, and experiences of self-authenticity. Applied Linguistics 38, no. 5: 713–736.
Henry, A. and M. Lamb. 2020. L2 motivation and digital technologies. In Palgrave Handbook of Motivation for Language
Learning, ed. M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry and S. Ryan, 599–619. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Henry, A. and C. Thorsen. 2018. Teacher–student relationships and L2 motivation. The Modern Language Journal 102, no.
1: 218–241.
Henry, A., S. Davydenko and Z. Dörnyei. 2015. The anatomy of directed motivational currents: exploring intense and
enduring periods of L2 motivation. The Modern Language Journal 99: 329–345.
Heras, A. and D. Lasagabaster. 2015. The impact of CLIL on affective factors and vocabulary learning. Language Teaching
Research 19, no. 1: 70–88.
Hernández, T. A. 2010. The relationship among motivation, interaction, and the development of second language oral
proficiency in a study-abroad context. The Modern Language Journal 94, no. 4: 600–617.
Higgins, E.T. 1987. Self-discrepancy: a theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review 94, no. 3: 319–40.
Hiver, P. 2013. The interplay of possible language teacher selves in professional development choices. Language
Teaching Research 17, no. 2: 210–227.
Hiver, P. 2017. Tracing the signature dynamics of language teacher immunity: a retrodictive qualitative modeling study.
Hiver, P. and A.H. Al-Hoorie. 2020. Research Methods for Complexity Theory in Applied Linguistics. Bristol: Multilingual
Matters.
Hiver, P. and M. Papi. 2019. Complexity theory and L2 motivation. In The Palgrave Handbook of Motivation for Language
Learning, ed. M. Lamb, A. Henry, K. Csizér and S. Ryan, 117–137. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hiver, P., T.-Y. Kim and Y. Kim. 2018. Language teacher motivation. In Language Teacher Psychology, ed. S. Mercer and A.
Kostoulas, 18–33. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Hsieh, P.P.H. and H.S. Kang. 2010. Attribution and self-efficacy and their interrelationship in the Korean EFL context.
Language Learning 60, no. 3: 606–627.
Islam, M., M. Lamb and G. Chambers. 2013. The L2 motivational self system and national interest: a Pakistani perspective.
System 41, no. 2: 231–44.
MacIntyre, P.D., C. Burns and A. Jessome. 2011. Ambivalence about communicating in a second language: a qualitative
study of French immersion students’ willingness to communicate. The Modern Language Journal 95, no. 1: 81–96.
Khajavy, G.H., B. Ghonsooly, A.H. Fatemi and C.W. Choi. 2016. Willingness to communicate in English: a microsystem
model in the Iranian EFL classroom context. TESOL Quarterly 50: 154–80.
Kikuchi, K. 2015. Demotivation in Second Language Acquisition: Insights from Japan. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Kikuchi, K. 2017. Reexamining demotivators and motivators: a longitudinal study of Japanese freshmen’s dynamic
system in an EFL context. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 11, no. 2: 128–45.
Kormos, J. and K. Csizer. 2014. The interaction of motivation, self-regulatory strategies, and autonomous learning behav-
ior in different learner groups. TESOL Quarterly 48, no. 2: 275–299.
Kormos, J. and Y. Préfontaine. 2017. Affective factors influencing fluent performance: French learners’ appraisals of
second language speech tasks. Language Teaching Research 21, no. 6: 699–716.
Kormos, J. and J. Wilby. 2019. Task motivation. In Palgrave Handbook of Motivation for Language Learning, ed. M. Lamb,
K. Csizér, A. Henry and S. Ryan, 267–86. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kormos, J., T. Kiddle and K. Csizér. 2011. Systems of goals, attitudes, and self-related beliefs in second-language-learning
motivation. Applied Linguistics 32, no. 5: 495–516.
Kontra, E.H. 2020. The L2 motivation of learners with special educational needs. In Palgrave Handbook of Motivation for
Language Learning, ed. M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry and S. Ryan, 495–513. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
Kozaki, Y. and S.J. Ross. 2011. Contextual dynamics in foreign language learning motivation. Language Learning 61, no.
4: 1328–1354.
Kubanyiova, M. 2015. The role of teachers’ future self guides in creating L2 development opportunities in teacher-led
classroom discourse: reclaiming the relevance of language teacher cognition. The Modern Language Journal 99, no. 3:
565–584.
Kubanyiova, M. 2019. Language teacher motivation research: its ends, means and future commitments. In The Palgrave
Handbook of Motivation for Language Learning, eds M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, and S. Ryan, 389-407. Basingstoke,
UK: Palgrave.
Kumaravadivelu, B. 2012. Language Teacher Education for a Global Society: A Modular Model for Knowing, Analysing,
Recognising, Doing, and Seeing. New York, NY: Routledge.
Lamb, M. 2004. Integrative motivation in a globalizing world. System 32: 3–19.
Lamb, M. 2012. A self system perspective on young adolescents’ motivation to learn English in urban and rural settings.
Language learning 62, no. 4: 997–1023.
Lamb, M. 2019. Motivational teaching strategies. In Palgrave Handbook of Motivation for Language Learning, ed. M.
Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry and S. Ryan, 287–305. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lamb, M. and M. Wedell. 2015. Cultural contrasts and commonalities in inspiring language teaching. Language Teaching
Research 19, no. 2: 207–224.
Lambert, C., J. Philp and S. Nakamura. 2017. Learner-generated content and engagement in second language task per-
formance. Language Teaching Research 21, no. 6: 665–680.
Lanvers, U. 2017. Contradictory others and the habitus of languages: surveying the L2 motivation landscape in the
United Kingdom. The Modern Language Journal 101, no. 3: 517–532.
Lasagabaster, D. 2017. Language learning motivation and language attitudes in multilingual Spain from an international
perspective. The Modern Language Journal 101, no. 3: 583–596.
Lasagabaster, D. and A. Doiz. 2017. A longitudinal study on the impact of CLIL on affective factors. Applied Linguistics 38,
no. 5: 688–712.
Leeming, P. 2019. Emergent leadership and group interaction in the task-based language classroom. TESOL Quarterly 53,
no. 3: 768–793.
Leary, M.R. 2007. Motivational and emotional aspects of the self. Annual Review of Psychology 58: 317–44.
Lee, I., S. Yu and Y. Liu. 2018. Hong Kong secondary students’ motivation in EFL writing: a survey study. TESOL Quarterly
52, no. 1: 176–187.
Lou, N.M. and K.A. Noels. 2017. Measuring language mindsets and modeling their relations with goal orientations and
emotional and behavioral responses in failure situations. The Modern Language Journal 101, no. 1: 214–243.
MacIntyre, P.D., T. Gregersen and S. Mercer. 2019. Setting an agenda for positive psychology in SLA: theory, practice, and
research. The Modern Language Journal 103, no. 1: 262–274.
MacIntyre, P.D., S.C. Baker and H. Sparling. 2017. Heritage passions, heritage convictions, and the rooted L2 self: music
and Gaelic language learning in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia. The Modern Language Journal 101, no. 3: 501–16.
MacIntyre, P.D., C. Burns and A. Jessome. 2011. Ambivalence about communicating in a second language: a qualitative
study of French immersion students’ willingness to communicate. The Modern Language Journal 95, no. 1: 81–96.
Markus, H.R. and P. Nurius. 1986. Possible selves. American Psychologist 41, no. 9: 954–69.
Marsden, E., S. Thompson and L. Plonsky. 2018. A methodological synthesis of self-paced reading in second language
research. Applied Psycholinguistics 39, no. 5: 861–904.
Moskovsky, C., F. Alrabai, S. Paolini and S. Ratcheva, S. 2013. The effects of teachers’ motivational strategies on learners’
motivation: a controlled investigation of second language acquisition. Language Learning 63, no. 1: 34–62.
McClelland, N. 2000. Goal orientations in Japanese college students learning EFL. In Individual Differences in Foreign
Language Learning: Effects of Aptitude, Intelligence, and Motivation, ed. S. Cornwell and P. Robinson, 99–115.
Tokyo: Aoyama Gakuin University.
Mercer, S. and Z. Dörnyei. 2020. Engaging Language Learners in Contemporary Classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Moeller, A.J., J.M. Theiler and C. Wu. 2012. Goal setting and student achievement: a longitudinal study. The Modern
Moskovsky, C., T. Assulaimani, S. Racheva and J. Harkins. 2016. The L2 motivational self system and L2 achievement: a
study of Saudi EFL learners. The Modern Language Journal 100, no. 3: 641–654.
Muir, C. 2020. Directed Motivational Currents and Language Education: Exploring Implications for Pedagogy. Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.
Munezane, Y. 2015. Enhancing willingness to communicate: relative effects of visualization and goal setting. The Modern
Language Journal 99, no.1: 175–191.
Nagle, C. 2018. Motivation, comprehensibility, and accentedness in L2 Spanish: investigating motivation as a time-
varying predictor of pronunciation development. The Modern Language Journal 102, no. 1: 199–217.
Nitta, R. and K. Baba. 2015. Self-regulation in the evolution of the ideal L2 self: a omplex dynamic systems approach to
the L2 motivational self system. In Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning, ed. Z. Dörnyei, P. MacIntyre and A.
Henry, 367–98. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Noels, K.A., D.I.V. Lascano and K. Saumure. 2019. The development of self-determination across the language course:
trajectories of motivational change and the dynamic interplay of psychological needs, orientations, and engage-
ment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 41, no. 4: 821–851.
Oxford, R.L. 2020. Snapshots in time: time in Gardner’s theory and Gardner’s theory across time. In Contemporary
Language Motivation Theory: 60 Years Since Gardner and Lambert (1959), ed. A. Al-Hoorie and P.D. MacIntyre, 171–
93. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Papi, M. 2018. Motivation as quality: regulatory fit effects on incidental vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition 40, no. 4: 707–730.
Papi, M. and E. Abdollahzadeh. 2012. Teacher motivational practice, student motivation, and possible L2 selves: an
examination in the Iranian EFL context. Language Learning 62, no. 2: 571–94.
Papi, M., A.V. Bondarenko, S. Mansouri, L. Feng and C. Jiang. 2019. Rethinking L2 motivation research: the 2×2 model of
L2 self-guides. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 41, no. 2: 337–361.
Papi, M. and Y. Teimouri. 2014. Language learner motivational types: a cluster analysis study. Language Learning 64, no.
3: 493–525.
Papi, M., A. Rios, H. Pelt and E. Ozdemir. 2019. Feedback-seeking behavior in language learning: basic components and
motivational antecedents. The Modern Language Journal 103, no.1: 205–226.
Peng, J.E. and L. Woodrow. 2010. Willingness to communicate in English: a model in the Chinese EFL classroom context.
Paquot, M. and L. Plonsky. 2017. Quantitative research methods and study quality in learner corpus research.
International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 3: 61–94.
Park, H. and P. Hiver. 2017. Profiling and tracing motivational change in project-based L2 learning. System 67: 50–64.
Pawlak, M., A. Mystkowska-Wiertelak. and J. Bielak. 2016. Investigating the nature of classroom willingness to commu-
nicate (WTC): a micro-perspective. Language Teaching Research 20, no. 5: 654–671.
Pennycook, A. and S. Makoni. 2020. Innovations and Challenges in Applied Linguistics from the Global South. New York,
NY: Routledge.
Phung, L. 2017. Task preference, affective response, and engagement in L2 use in a US university context. Language
Pladevall-Ballester, E. 2019. A longitudinal study of primary school EFL learning motivation in CLIL and non-CLIL set-
tings. Language Teaching Research 23, no. 6: 765–786.
Plonsky, L. 2013. Study quality in SLA: An assessment of designs, analyses, and reporting practices in quantitative L2
research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 35: 655–87.
Plonsky, L. 2014. Study quality in quantitative L2 research (1990–2010): a methodological synthesis and call for reform.
The Modern Language Journal 98: 440–60.
Polat, N. and D.L. Schallert. 2013. Kurdish adolescents acquiring Turkish: their self-determined motivation and identifi-
cation with L1 and L2 communities as predictors of L2 accent attainment. The Modern Language Journal 97, no. 3:
745–763.
Poupore, G. 2016. Measuring group work dynamics and its relation with L2 learners’ task motivation and language pro-
duction. Language Teaching Research 20, no. 6: 719–740.
Poupore, G. 2018. A complex systems investigation of group work dynamics in L2 interactive tasks. The Modern
Qiu, X. and Y.Y. Lo. 2017. Content familiarity, task repetition and Chinese EFL learners’ engagement in second language
use. Language Teaching Research 21, no. 6: 681–698.
Ro, E. 2018. Understanding reading motivation from EAP students’ categorical work in a focus group. TESOL Quarterly
52, no. 4: 772–797.
Saito, K., J.M. Dewaele, M. Abe and Y. In’nami. 2018. Motivation, emotion, learning experience, and second language
comprehensibility development in classroom settings: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Language
Learning 68, no. 3: 709–43.
Sampson, R. 2012. The language-learning self, self-enhancement activities, and self perceptual change. Language
Sampson, R.J. 2019. Openness to messages about English as a foreign language: working with learners to uncover
purpose to study. Language Teaching Research 23, no.1: 126–142.
Sasaki, M. 2011. Effects of varying lengths of study-abroad experiences on Japanese EFL students’ L2 writing ability and
motivation: a Longitudinal Study. TESOL Quarterly, 45, no. 1: 81–105.
Sasaki, M., Y. Kozaki and S.J. Ross. 2017. The impact of normative environments on learner motivation and L2 reading
ability growth. The Modern Language Journal 101, no. 1: 163–78.
Sasaki, M., A. Mizumoto and A. Murakami. 2018. Developmental trajectories in L2 writing strategy use: a self-regulation
perspective. The Modern Language Journal 102, no.2: 292–309.
Sugita McEown, M., Y. Sawaki and T. Harada. 2017. Foreign language learning motivation in the Japanese context: social
and political influences on self. The Modern Language Journal 101, no. 3: 533–547.
Teimouri, Y. 2017. L2 selves, emotions, and motivated behaviors. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 39, no. 4: 681–
709.
Teimouri, Y. 2018. Differential roles of shame and guilt in L2 learning: how bad is bad? The Modern Language Journal
102, no. 4: 632–652.
Teo, T., C.K.W. Hoi, X. Gao and L. Lv. 2019. What motivates Chinese university students to learn Japanese? understanding
their motivation in terms of ‘posture’. The Modern Language Journal 103, no.1: 327–342.
Thompson, A.S. 2017. Language learning motivation in the United States: an examination of language choice and multi-
lingualism. The Modern Language Journal 101, no. 3: 483–500.
Thompson, A.S. and C. Vásquez. 2015. Exploring motivational profiles through language learning narratives. The Modern
Tullock, B. and L. Ortega. 2017. Fluency and multilingualism in study abroad: lessons from a scoping review. System 71:
7–21.
Ushioda, E. 2013a. Motivation in second language acquisition. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ed. C.A.
Chapelle, 3763–8. Oxford, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
Ushioda, E. 2013b. Motivation and ELT: global issues and local concerns. In International Perspectives on Motivation:
Language Learning and Professional Challenges, ed. E. Ushioda, 1–17. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ushioda, E. 2017. The impact of global English on motivation to learn other languages: toward an ideal multilingual self.
Ushioda, E. 2019a. Motivation and multilingualism. In Twelve Lectures on Multilingualism, ed. D. Singleton and L. Aronin,
179–211. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Ushioda, E. 2019b. Researching L2 motivation: past, present and future. In The Palgrave Handbook of Motivation for
Language Learning, ed. M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry and S. Ryan, 661–82. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ushioda, E. 2020. Researching L2 motivation: re-evaluating the role of qualitative inquiry, or the ‘wine and conversation’
approach. In Contemporary Language Motivation Theory: 60 Years Since Gardner and Lambert (1959), ed. A.H. Al-
Hoorie and P.D. MacIntyre, 194–211. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Van den Branden, K. 2016. Task-based language teaching. In The Routledge Handbook of English Language Teaching, ed.
G. Hall, 238–251. New York, NY: Routledge.
Visonà, M. W. and Plonsky, L. 2020. Arabic as a heritage language: a scoping review. International Journal of Bilingualism,
24 no. 4: 599-615.
Waninge, F., Z. Dörnyei and K. de Bot. 2014. Motivational dynamics in language learning: change, stability and context.
Modern Language Journal 98, no. 3: 704–23.
Yashima, T. 2000. Orientations and motivation in foreign language learning: a study of Japanese college students. JACET
Bulletin 31: 121–33.
Yashima, T., P. MacIntyre and M. Ikeda. 2018. Situated willingness to communicate in an L2: interplay of individual
characteristics and context. Language Teaching Research 22, no. 1: 115–37.
Yashima, T., R. Nishida and A. Mizumoto. 2017. Influence of learner beliefs and gender on the motivating power of L2
selves. The Modern Language Journal 101, no. 4: 691–711.
You, C.J. and Z Dörnyei. 2016. Language learning motivation in China: results of a large-scale stratified survey. Applied
Linguistics 37, no. 4: 495–519.
You, C.J., Z. Dörnyei and K. Csizér. 2016. Motivation, vision, and gender: a survey of learners of English in China.
Yun, S., P. Hiver and A.H. Al-Hoorie. 2018. Academic buoyancy: exploring learners’ everyday resilience in the language
classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 40, no. 4: 805–830.
Yuan, R., P. Sun and T. Teng. 2016. Understanding language teachers’ motivations towards research. TESOL Quarterly 50,
no. 1: 220–234.
Zarrinabadi, N. and M. Tavakoli. 2017. Exploring motivational surges among Iranian EFL teacher trainees: directed moti-
vational currents in focus. TESOL Quarterly 51, no. 1: 155–166.
Ziegler, N.A. 2014. Fostering self-regulated learning through the European language portfolio: an embedded mixed
methods study. The Modern Language Journal 98, no.4: 921–936.
Appendix
Descriptive information of 100 studies examined in the review.
Focus
Applied Linguistics
1. Kormos et al. (2011) How language-learning goals, attitudes, self-related beliefs, and parental encouragement
interact in shaping motivated behaviour
2. Alrabai (2016) Effects of motivational strategies on learner motivation and achievement
3. You and Dörnyei (2016) The general level of L2 motivation in China
4. Henry and Cliffordson (2017) Impact of out-of-school factors on motivation
5. Csizér and Tankó (2017) Strategy use in academic writing
6. Lasagabaster and Doiz (2017) Impact of CLIL on affective factors
7. Doucerain (2019) Migrants’ L2 experience
TESOL Quarterly
8. Chang (2010) Group processes (e.g. group cohesiveness and group norms) and learner motivation
9. Fushino (2010) Group work and willingness to communicate
10. Sasaki (2011) Students’ L2 writing ability and motivation
11. Cao (2014) Sociocognitive perspective on L2 classroom willingness to communicate
12. Cheng et al. (2014) Test-takers’ motivation, test anxiety, and test performance
13. Fox et al. (2014) The impact of English language programmes on L2 students’ motivation
14. Kormos and Csizér (2014) The influence of motivational factors and self-regulatory strategies on autonomous learning
behaviour
15. Khajavy et al. (2016) willingness to communicate in English
16. Yuan and Teng (2016) Understanding language teachers’ motivations towards research
17. Zarrinabadi and Tavakoli Motivational surges among Iranian EFL teacher trainees
(2017)
18. Doiz and Lasagabaster (2018) L2 self system in English-medium instruction
19. Henry et al. (2018) Motivational strategies and the reframing of English
20. Lee et al. (2018) Students’ motivation in EFL writing
21. Ro (2018) Reading motivation and EAP students’ categorical work in a focus group
22. Al-Murtadha (2019) Enhancing EFL learners’ willingness to communicate with visualisation
23. Gan et al. (2018) Classroom assessment practices and learning motivation
24. Henry (2019) Online media creation and L2 motivation
25. Leeming (2019) Emergent leadership and group interaction in the task-based language classroom
The Modern Language Journal
26. Csizér et al. (2010) Dynamics of language learning attitudes and motivation
27. Hernández (2010) The relationship among motivation, interaction, and the development of second language
oral proficiency in a study-abroad context
28. Erler and Macaro (2011) Decoding ability and motivation in French
29. MacIntyre et al. (2011) Ambivalence about communicating in a L2
30. James (2012) An investigation of motivation to transfer second language learning
31. Moeller et al. (2012) Goal and student achievement
32. Busse and Walter (2013) Motivational changes and their causes
33. Polat and Schallert (2013) Self-determined motivation and identification with L1 and L2 communities
34. Waninge et al. (2014) Motivational dynamic in language learning
35. Ziegler (2014) Fostering self-regulated learning
36. Henry et al. (2015) The anatomy of directed motivational currents
37. Kubanyiova (2015) Teachers’ future self guides
38. Munezane (2015) Enhancing willingness to communicate: Relative effects of visualisation and goal setting
39. Thompson and Vásquez (2015) Exploring motivational profiles through language learning narratives
(Continued )
Continued.
Focus
40. Acheson et al. (2016) The burnout spiral: The emotion labour of five rural U.S. foreign language teachers
41. Moskovsky et al. (2016) The L2 MSS and L2 achievement
42. Hiver (2017) The signature dynamics of language teacher immunity
43. Lou and Noels (2017) Measuring language mindsets. Introduces the Language Mindsets Inventory
44. Sasaki et al. (2017) Impact of normative environments on learner motivation and L2 reading ability growth
45. Yashima et al. (2017) Influence of learner beliefs and gender on the motivating power of L2 selves
46. Dörnyei and Al-Hoorie (2017) Motivational foundation of learning languages other than global English
47. Ushioda (2017) Ideal multilingual self
48. Thompson (2017) Language learning motivation in US and multilingualism
49. MacIntyre, Baker and Sparling Heritage passions, heritage convictions, and the rooted L2 self
(2017)
50. Lanvers et al. (2017) Surveying the L2 motivation landscape in the UK
51. Sugita McEown et al. (2017) Language learning motivation in the Japanese context
52. Henry (2017) The ideal multilingual self
53. Busse (2017) Plurilingualism in Europe
54. Lasagabaster (2017) Language learning motivation and language attitudes in multilingual Spain
55. Cho (2018) Task complexity and modality
56. Henry and Thorsen (2018) Teacher–student relationships and L2 motivation
57. Nagle (2018) Motivation, comprehensibility, and accentedness in L2 Spanish
58. Poupore (2018) A complex systems investigation of group work dynamics in L2 interactive tasks
59. Sasaki et al. (2018) Developmental trajectories in L2 writing strategy use
60. Teimouri (2018) Differential roles of shame and guilt in L2 learning
61. Lambert and Zhang (2019) Task engagement in the Use of English.
62. MacIntyre et al. (2019) An agenda for positive psychology in SLA
63. Papi et al. (2019) Feedback-seeking behaviour in language learning
64. Teo et al. (2019) Chinese university students’ motivation to learn Japanese
Language Teaching Research
65. Freiermuth and Huang (2012) Intercultural online synchronic chat task and its effect on motivation
66. Sampson (2012) The language-learning self, self-enhancement activities, and self-perceptual change
67. Hiver (2013) The interplay of possible language teacher selves in professional development choices
68. Gao and Xu (2014) Interpreting teachers’ motivation to teach. visions of the ‘ideal self’
69. Heras and Lasagabaster (2015) The impact of CLIL on affective factors and vocabulary learning
70. Lamb and Wedell (2015) Cultural contrasts and commonalities in inspiring language teaching
71. Pawlak et al. (2016) Investigating the nature of willingness to communicate
72. Poupore (2016) Group work dynamics and its relation with L2 learners task motivation and language
production
73. Aubrey (2017) Inter-cultural contact and flow in a task-based Japanese EFL classroom
74. Butler (2017) Motivational elements of digital instructional games
75. Kormos and Préfontaine (2017) Affective factors influencing fluent performance.
76. Lambert et al. (2017) Learner-generated content and engagement in second language task performance
77. Phung (2017) Task engagement in L2 use
78. Qiu and Lo (2017) Task engagement in second language use
79. Chow et al. (2018) Anxiety in reading and listening English
80. Yashima et al. (2018) Situated willingness to communicate in the L2 context
81. Borg and Alshumaimeri (2019) Language learner autonomy in a tertiary context
82. Pladevall-Ballester (2019) A longitudinal study of primary school EFL learning motivation in CLIL and non-CLIL
settings
83. Sampson (2019) Openness to messages about English as a foreign language
Language Learning
84. Hsieh and Kang (2010) Attribution and self-efficacy and their interrelationship in the Korean EFL context
85. Peng and Woodrow (2010) Willingness to communicate in English
86. Kozaki and Ross (2011) Contextual dynamics in language learning motivation
87. Lamb (2012) A self system perspective on young adolescents’ motivation to learn English in urban and
rural settings
88. Papi and Abdollahzadeh Teacher motivational practice, student motivation, and possible L2 selves
(2012)
89. Dörnyei and Chan (2013) Motivation and vision
90. Henry and Cliffordson (2013) Motivation, gender, and possible delves
91. Moskovsky et al. (2013) Effects of teachers’ motivational strategies on learners’ motivation
(Continued )
Continued.
Focus
92. Papi and Teimouri (2014) Language learner motivational types: A cluster analysis study
93. You et al. (2016) Motivation, vision, and gender
94. Saito et al. (2018) Motivation, emotion and learning experience
Studies in Second Language
Acquisition
95. Foster et al. (2014) The influence of exposure, memory, age of onset, and motivation in foreign language and
immersion settings
96. Teimouri (2017) Language learners’ emotional experiences and L2 future self-guides
97. Papi (2018) Motivation as quality
98. Yun et al. (2018) Academic buoyancy
99. Noels et al. (2019) Self-determination theory across the language course
100. Papi et al. (2019) Rethinking L2 motivation research: The 2X2 model of L2 self-guides

Second Language Motivation Research 2010 2019 A Synthetic Exploration

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

Second Language Motivation Research 2010 2019 A Synthetic Exploration

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Language Learning Journal

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/rllj20

Second language motivation research 2010–2019:

Mohammad Hadi Mahmoodi & Moslem Yousefi

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2020.1869809

Published online: 13 Jan 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 4031

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 16 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Second language motivation research 2010–2019: a synthetic

CONTACT Mohammad Hadi Mahmoodi mhmahmoodi@basu.ac.ir

of research on L2 motivation, attempting to chart a critical orientation to the scope of motivational

Signiﬁcance of the study and research questions

reporting practices found in empirical research on L2 motivation. Accordingly, motivated by the

1. How do studies characterise and conceptualise language learning motivation?

Table 1. Coding scheme for L2 motivation studies.

Table 2. Journals where studies of L2 motivation appear.

RQ1: Characterising ‘language learning motivation’

RQ2: Theoretical frameworks employed in L2 motivation studies

Figure 2. Unit of analysis in L2 motivation research.

Figure 3. Division of motivation studies by type of theoretical framework.

RQ3: Research methods and reporting practices

Figure 4. Types of research methods used in motivation study reports.

(2015: 151–152) classiﬁcation of research methodologies. We divided quantitative research methods

RQ 4: Instruments and learning/research contexts

Figure 5. Division of motivation studies by learning context.

Figure 6. Division of motivation studies by research context.

RQ 5: Directions for future motivation research

Discussion and conclusions

Motivational group dynamics

Language teacher motivation

Technology and motivation

The L2 motivation of students with disabilities

Limitations and directions for future research

Descriptive information of 100 studies examined in the review.

You might also like