The Relationship between Personality and Language Learning Strategies 心理语言学论文.doc

《The Relationship between Personality and Language Learning Strategies 心理语言学论文.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《The Relationship between Personality and Language Learning Strategies 心理语言学论文.doc（8页珍藏版）》请在三一办公上搜索。

1、The Relationship between Personality and Language Learning StrategiesAbstractFor several decades, researchers have shifted their attention from seeking the best teaching approaches to studying learners individual differences. More and more researchers agree that the following are important variables

2、 in which individual learners may differ: intelligence, language aptitude, personality (such as extraversion/introversion, perseverance, and anxiety), learning strategies, and attitudes towards the target language and its native speakers (Liu Runqing, 2004). It indicates that the previous researches

3、 on these variables have proved to be helpful in understanding SLL process (Skehan, 1989).Based on the previous researches and the relevant theories, this study focuses on two of the above variables: personality (extravcrsion/introversion) and language learning strategies, and is aimed at exploring

4、the relationships among these: the extraversion/introversion (E/1) tendencies of Chinese students, their proficiency in English as a foreign language (EFL) and their foreign language learning (FLL) strategies employment.A survey study has been made among 110 senior high school students. Two self-rep

5、ortquestionnaires -Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPO) and Foreign Language Learning Strategies Questionnaire, and one language proficiency test-the College Entrance Examination (in Shanghai) have been administrated to them, in order to identify the students personality traits (E/1), their learn

6、ing strategies and their foreign language proficiency.Key words: extraversion/introversion relationship English as a foreign language Proficiency foreign language learning strategiesIntroductionBackground of This studyFor centuries, efforts have been made to look for the best teaching method in fore

7、ignlanguage teaching (FLT)/second language teaching (SIT). Numerous methods are involved, but not one seems good enough to be universally accepted as the BEST. It has been found, instead, that whatever the methodology, the material, the condition under which a foreign language is taught, some learne

8、rs are always more successful than others, while there will be, invariably, one or two total failures. This has forced researchers to consider if it is the difference in individual learners that causes such disparity in ultimate attainment when the external environment is very nearly identical.Resea

9、rchers have begun to shift their attention from seeking the best method to studying Individual differences. After more than two decades of research, individual-difference research has made deniable progress in the sense that methods have improved a great deal, instruments have grown in terms of vari

10、ety and reliability, and the number of variables has shrunk to a few More researchers would agree that the following are important variables in which individual learners may differ: intelligence, language aptitude, personality (such as extraversion/ introversion, perseverance, anxiety), learning str

11、ategies (such as cognitive, metacognitive, formal, and instrumental), and attitudes towards the target language and its native speakers(Liu Runqing, 2004).In order to deeply understand FLL process of Chinese students and to promote English teaching, according to the previous researches and relevant

12、theories, this study focuses on two of the above variables: personality (extraversion/introversion) and language learning strategies, and is aimed at exploring the relationships among these: the extraversion/introversion (E/I) tendencies of Chinese students, their proficiency in English as a foreign

13、 language (EFL) and their foreign language learning (FLL) strategies employment.Literature ReviewTheoretic and empirical research on personality and on this section presents thelanguage learning strategies.1.1 Basic Terms of Personality ResearchIn this part, definition of personality is offered, and

14、 the traits and types of personality are introduced; among these traits extraversion/introversion is focused on.1.1.1 PersonalityIn the Encyclopedia Britannica (volume 6, 1768), personality is defined as thecharacteristic way in which a particular individual thinks, feels, and. behaves. Personality

15、embraces a persons moods, attitudes, and opinions and is most clearly expressed in his intensions with other people. Personality is those behavioral characteristics, both inherent and acquired, which distinguish each individual and are observable in his relations to the environment and to the social

16、 group.1.1.2 Traits and Types of PersonalityIn general psychology, personality has been explored in terms of a number of personality traits or types, which in aggregate are said to constitute the personality of an individual.Raymond B. Cattell (1965), in his early research, isolated 16 personality f

17、actors, which he composed into a test called 16PF (16 Personality Factors). He attempted to measure personality using a series of dichotomies, seen as poles on continua, such as cool/warm, shy/venturesome, not assertive/dominant. Later research added seven more factors to the list. Even later resear

18、ch added twelve pathological factors found using items from the MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory). A second order factor analysis on the total of 35 factors revealed eight deeper factors, as follows, in order of strength: QI. Exvia (extraversion) QII. Anxiety (Neuroticism) QIII. Cor

19、teria (cortical alertness, practical and realistic) QIV. Independence (strong loner types) QV. Discreetness (socially shrewd types) QVI. Subjectivity (distant and out-of-it) QVII. Intelligence (IQ!)QVIII. Good Upbringing (stable, docile, the salt of the earth)Eysenck (1964) identified two major dime

20、nsions of personality: Extraversion/Introversionand Neuroticism. In 1990, R. R. McCrae and P.TCosta, Jr., presented The Five Factor Theory,including the following: Extraversion/Introversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness,Emotional stability/Neuroticism and Culture or Openness to experience.Howeve

21、r, with one or two exceptions (e.g. Hawkey 1982), SLA researchers havepreferred to develop their own battery of personality traits, calling them anything from social styles(Fillmore 1979; Strong 1983) to egocentric factors (Brown 1981). This confusion is a result of both the many-faceted nature of p

22、ersonality and the need that individual researchers have felt to investigate which intuitively strike them as important. (Ellis R.1994:120)Although personality theorists presented various theories from different directions, westill managed to find some parallel sets of description of personality tra

23、its and types. Almost every theorist put Extraversion/Introversion and Neuroticism/Emotional Stability/Anxiety into their lists.1.1.3 Extraversion/IntroversionEysenck and Chan (1982:154) describe extraversion and introversion as the following: Extraversion is characterized by being outgoing, talkati

24、ve, high on positive affect (feeling good), and in need of external stimulation. Extraverts are sociable, like parties, have many friends and need excitement; they are sensation-seekers and risk takers, like practical jokes and are lively and active. Conversely introverts are chronically over-arouse

25、d and jittery and are therefore in need of peace and quiet to bring them up to an optimal level of performance. They are quiet, prefer reading to meeting people, have few but close friends and usually avoid excitement.1.2 Eysencks Theory on PersonalityEysencks theory is based primarily on physiology

26、 and genetics. Although he was abehaviorist who considered learned habits of great importance, he regarded personality differences as growing out of our genetic inheritance. He was, therefore, primarily interested in what is usually called temperament.Temperament is that aspect of our personalities

27、that is genetically based, inborn, frombirth or even before. That does not mean that a temperament theorist neglects the aspects of our personality that are learned, it just means that Eysenck focused more on nature and left nurture to other theorists.1.3. Language Learning StrategiesAll learners us

28、e strategies in their process of learning a second/foreign language, but they may choose different strategies to deal with the same task. Why will it happen? According to Spolskys (2000:112) theory, a second language learner usually brings to the language Teaming situation a set of notions about wha

29、t is involved in the task; these expectations interact with personality factors and the actual learning situation to determine the strategies that the learner will adopt. In the second/foreign language learning arena, the effect of student personality on instruction in learning strategies cannot be

30、overemphasized.1.3.1 Definition of Language Learning StrategiesThere is a considerable debate as to appropriate ways of defining language learningstrategies but no strong consensus as yet. Here is a table interpreting the definitions in terms of language learning strategies (see Table 1.3):Learning

31、strategies, according to Weinstein and Mayer (1986:315), have learningfacilitation as a goal and are intentional on the part of the learner. The goal of strategy use is to affect the learners motivational or affective state, or the, way in which the learner selects, acquires, organizes, or integrate

32、s new knowledge.Stern (1983) points out that strategy is best reserved for general tendencies or overallcharacteristics of the approach employed by the language learner, leaving techniques as the term to refer to particular forms of observable learning behavior.Oxford (1990:8) defines language learn

33、ing strategies as specific actions taken by thelearner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable to new situations.Chamot (1987:71) puts forward that learning strategies are techniques, approaches, or deliberate actions that students t

34、ake in order to facilitate the learning and recall of both linguistic and content area information.Cohen (2000:4) believes language learning and language use those processes which are consciously selected by learners and which may result in action to enhance the learning or use of a second language

35、or foreign language, through the retention, recall, and application of information about that language.Rubin (1981) takes the point of view that learning strategies are strategies which contribute to the development of language system which learners construct and affect learning directly.Wen Qiufang

36、 (1993) defines learning strategies as actions taken by learner for efficient learning. The definition emphasizes two points: (1) the purpose of using strategies is to improve learning efficiency; (2) the nature of strategies is learners actions rather than ideas and the actions can be both 4xternal

37、 and internal.Research Design2.1 IntroductionThis study employs a survey design to examine the relationship among extraversion/introversion, English as a foreign language proficiency and the employment of foreign language learning strategies of Chinese senior high school students.Results and Discuss

38、ion3.1 Relationship between Extraversion and English ProficiencyThe first research question seeks to explore the relationship between extraversion/introversion and English proficiency.3.1.1 Correlation between Extraversion and English Proficiency待添加的隐藏文字内容3 Table 3.1.1 Presents the correlation coeff

39、icients between extraversion and English proficiencyIt shows extraversion had negative significant correlation with English proficiency(r=-.194, p05); the coefficient is close to Wu Yian and I.la Rungings (1993) findings卜-.1650, p05). The Pearson Correlation coefficient between extraversion andEngli

40、sh proficiency is negative, so a tentative inference can be made that introverts may have better performance than extraverts. This has been proved in the other researches (Smart et al. 1975; Busch 1982) mentioned in Chapter 1.3.Table 3.1.1 also presents the significant ,correlation between extravers

41、ion and listening score (LIS) (r=一212, p05), the negative coefficient also says introverts may do better at listening comprehension. However, extraversion is not significantly correlated with other sub-scores, such as scores on writing (WRI), translation (fRA), reading (REA), cloze (CLO), vocabulary

42、 and grammar (V&G).ConclusionsThis chapter provides the major findings of the study and their implications to language learning on one hand, and illustrates the limitations and recommendations for further study on the other.4.1 Major or Findings of the Study and Their Implications to Language Learni

43、ngThe role of individual differences in foreign language learning has attracted more andmore attention of research in second/foreign language acquisition (SLA/FLA). This is why the study chooses extraversion/introversion and foreign language learning strategies as variables and focuses on the effect

44、 of extraversion/introversion on foreign language proficiency and the learning strategies, and exploring the relationship among them.The findings of the study are as follows:First, extraversion negatively correlates with foreign language proficiency (r=-194, p05) and with sub-score in listening (r=-

45、212, p05). In general, introverts have better performance than extraverts both in proficiency test and listening, reading, cloze, writing, translation, vocabulary and grammar. Extraverts and introverts show a significant difference in the mean of total score of CEES and that of reading, listening an

46、d translation. The study also reveals there is a significant difference between male extraverts and introverts in total score, writing, reading and listening. For female extraverts and introverts, the significant difference exists only in reading.Secondly, extraversion positively correlates with met

47、acognitive strategies and affective strategies. In a follow-up study, it is found that there is a positive correlation between extraversion and self-monitoring strategies, also between extraversion and cooperation strategies. The independent sample t-test shows no significant difference in the means

48、 of strategies employment except self-monitoring strategies between extraverts and introverts.Thirdly, among three representative strategies, only cognitive strategies significantlycorrelate with total score, reading as well as listening. There are three representative strategies in cognitive catego

49、ries among which linguistic knowledge strategies (COGI) significantly correlate with total score, reading and listening. Similarly, cognitive psychology strategies (COG3) have slight correlation with total score, reading and listening, whereas cognitive no correlation with these scores. It is noted that (COG