Willingness To Communicate in The Second Language

Willingness to Communicate in the Second Language:
Proximal and Distal Influences

Presented at the 33rd annual conference of the
Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics, Halifax, NS, Canada.
June 1, 2003
Peter D. MacIntyre
University College of Cape Breton,
PO Box 5300, Sydney N.S., Canada B1P 6L2
Web: http://faculty.uccb.ns.ca/pmacintyre , click on “Research Pages”
Language learning produces both linguistic outcomes, such as competence in

language production and comprehension, and non-linguistics outcomes, such as changes in
motivation and attitudes. Communication in the second language depends greatly on a
psychological readiness to use the language. As Skehan (1989) has noted, the idea that one
must talk in order to learn a second language has been presupposed yet elusive for
researchers. Filling this conceptual void, Willingness to Communicate (WTC – McCroskey
& Baer, 1985, McCroskey 1992) can be defined as the probability that an individual will
choose to initiate communication, more specifically talk, when free to do so (MacIntyre
&Charos, 1996). As such, WTC can be conceptualized as a goal of second language
instruction, a variable that facilitates language learning itself, and an internal psychological
event with socially meaningful consequences. Initiating communication represents the
culmination of a network of processes at both the cultural and individual
levels. Developments in the theoretical modeling of those processes using the heuristic
“pyramid model” proposed by MacIntyre, Clément, Dörnyei and Noels (1998) has been
proceeding, and a collection of studies is now available relating to the WTC model. That
model captures and organizes several variables familiar to scholars studying individual
differences in language learning. By organizing these variables along Proximal-Distal lines,
the model accounts for variables that intuition indicates should relate to second language
communication, such as student personality (Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., Stern, H. H., &
Todesco, A., 1978)., but that have produced disappointing empirical results over the years
(Dewaele & Furnham, 1999).
Key results from studies of WTC, in both the first and second language, appear to
support the major tenets of the pyramid model. The origin of WTC lies in the literature on
communication (in the native language, see McCroskey &Richmond, 1990, 1991), therefore
results in both first and second language communication contexts are germane to the present
discussion. In particular, a laboratory study of participants using their native language
demonstrated that WTC predicts the initiation of communication on both easy and difficult
tasks, and that neither anxiety nor perceived competence was predictive (MacIntyre, Babin
&Clément, 1999). It is well known that both anxiety and perceived competence are
predictive of language learning and communicative behaviours, and that they can be
considered important outcomes of language learning as well. Results are showing that higher
levels of WTC also are an outcome of language learning. Studies comparing immersion with
non-immersion second language instruction, at both the junior high (MacIntyre, Baker,
Clément, &Donovan, 2002) and senior high school level (Baker & MacIntyre, 2000), confirm
two key predictions from the model. First, regardless of the type of program (immersion or
non-immersion), lower anxiety and higher perceived competence are correlated with higher
levels of WTC. The second prediction was that greater second language communication
experience would lead to higher levels of WTC, and this also was confirmed. Recent
research has focused on the social dimension of WTC. One study, examining the role that
significant others play in fostering WTC, showed that having social support from a student’s
best friend increased WTC for language communication outside the classroom, but not inside
(MacIntyre, Baker, Clément &Conrod, 2001). A more recent study demonstrates the
complexity introduced by contrasting the processes leading to communication across
majority-minority groups having different normative pressures to use the second language
(Clément, Baker &MacIntyre, in press). The lessons learned from research into additive and
subtractive bilingualism should not be lost on the present study of volitional control over
second language communication. If WTC represents the decision to initiate communication,
given the choice, then communication by minority groups learning a second language with
high ethnolinguistic vitality might not be governed by WTC, based on the absence of
choice. However, the majority group whose language enjoys strong support is in a situation
akin to additive bilingualism and choice to use the second language abounds. Under
conditions of volitional control, we indeed find that WTC plays a stronger role in second
language communication processes.
After reviewing results pertaining to the pyramid model of WTC, it is possible to
more clearly place of the construct within the broad literature on individual differences in
language learning. Specifically, we are able to differentiate WTC from related constructs
such as motivation, anxiety, perceived competence, and self-confidence. Interesting work
undertaken in Japan (Yashima, 2002) and elsewhere (Sallinen-Kuparinen, McCroskey, &
Richmond, 1991) is helping to locate WTC in the international literature as well. The
presentation will conclude with a summary of theoretical developments and an indication of
possible future research directions.
References
Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2000). The role of gender and immersion in communication and second
language orientations. Language Learning, 50, 311-341.
Dewaele, J.-M., & Furnham, A. (1999). Extraversion: The unloved variable in applied linguistic
research. Language Learning, 49, 509-544.
MacIntyre, P. D., Babin, P. A., & Clément, R. (1999). Willingness to communicate: Antecedents and
consequences. Communication Quarterly, 47, 215-229.
MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Conrod, S. (2001). Willingness to communicate, social support,
and language learning orientations of immersion students. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
23, 369-388.
MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Donovan, L. A. (2002). Willingness to communicate, anxiety,
perceived competence, and motivation among junior high school French immersion students. Language
Learning, 52, 537-564.
MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K.A. (1998). Conceptualising willingness to communicate
in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern Language Journal, 82, 545-562.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language
communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 3-26.
McCroskey, J. C. (1992). Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale. Communication
Quarterly, 40, 16-25.
McCroskey, J. C., & Baer, J. E. (1985, November). Willingness to communicate: The construct and its
measurement. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech Communication Association,
Denver, CO.
McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1990). Willingness to communicate: Differing cultural perspectives. The
Southern Communication Journal, 56, 72-77.
McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1991). Willingness to Communicate: A cognitive view. In M. Booth-
Butterfield (ed.)., Communication, cognition, and anxiety. (pp. 19-37). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., Stern, H. H., & Todesco, A. (1978). The good language learner. Toronto, Ontario:
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Sallinen-Kuparinen, A., McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1991). Willingness to communicate,
communication apprehension, introversion, and self-reported communication competence: Finnish and
American comparisons. Communication Research Reports, 8, 55-64.
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second language learning. London: Edward Arnold.
Swain, M., & Burnaby, B. (1976). Personality characteristics and second language learning in young children: A
pilot study. Working Papers on Bilingualism: No. 11.
Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The Modern
Language Journal, 86, 54
SOURCE: MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K.A. (1998). Conceptualising willingness to
communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern Language Journal,
82, 545-562.

Willingness To Communicate in The Second Language

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Willingness To Communicate in The Second Language

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Willingness To Communicate in The Second Language

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Willingness to Communicate in the Second Language:

Proximal and Distal Influences

Language learning produces both linguistic outcomes, such as competence in

You might also like