730 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol.

13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

Unveiling the Presence of Speech Anxiety: A Case of

English as an Additional Language
Ahmad Shabbir1, Abeera Saeed2 and Amina Shahzadi3
https://doi.org/10.62345/jads.2024.13.1.61
Abstract
This study explores speech anxiety in students learning English as an additional language (EAL)
in a university setting. Addressing classroom speech anxiety among university students is
paramount for fostering supportive learning environments and ensuring academic success
(Horwitz, 2001). Reducing classroom speech anxiety boosts students' confidence and persuasive
communication skills, which are crucial for professional success (McCroskey, 1982). This
research examined the many elements that influence classroom speaking anxiety in students at the
University of Education Lahore. The theoretical foundation of this research was the Foreign
Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) developed by Horwitz et al. (1986). The
questionnaire consisted of 25 items and was delivered to the Bachelor of Science (BS) English
department students. One hundred and three students responded to the questionnaire. Data was
analyzed quantitatively using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16,
which was launched in 2007. Results show that there is significant speech anxiety in students based
on their demographic background. The analysis of an open-ended question included in the
questionnaire reveals that psychologically, students think they have less competence than their
fellow students, followed by other psychological factors like fear of judgment and peer
comparison. It is recommended that EAL instructors should implement strategies aimed at
lowering students' anxiety levels so they can perform to the best of their abilities.
Keywords: Classroom Speech Anxiety, English as an Additional Language, English Teaching.

Introduction
Learners face particular difficulties and concerns when acquiring a second language (L2),
particularly regarding speaking abilities. According to Liu (2006), anxiety hurts students'
performance in the target language, especially in classrooms teaching foreign or second languages.
Hamid (2014) found that while EAL and English as a foreign language (EFL) learners perform
better in reading, writing, and listening, they struggle with speaking. Speech anxiety hampers
language learning, especially in second language contexts, as students may shy away from
speaking tasks due to fear of errors and criticism, inhibiting their linguistic advancement (Horwitz,
2001; McCroskey, 2015).
Understanding and resolving students' speech anxiety is critical for improving their academic
performance, language competency, and general well-being. Educators can use targeted

1
MPhil English (Linguistics) Scholar, Department of English, University of Education, Multan Campus.
Email: [email protected]
2
Lecturer, Department of English, University of Education, Lahore. Email: [email protected]
3
Assistant Professor, Department of English, University of Education, Lahore. Email: [email protected]

Copyright: ©This is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Compliance with ethical standards: There are no conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial). This study did not receive any funding.
731 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol. 13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

interventions to build supportive learning environments that promote successful communication

and overall student development by examining the prevalence and factors contributing to
classroom speech anxiety. Language anxiety, particularly in spoken language, is a significant
element affecting language learners' confidence and competency. Therefore, it is necessary to
identify it and take steps to remove it. While there has been a recent increase in research on Foreign
Language Speaking Anxiety (FLSA), no significant study has been done in the context of the
University of Education. A similar study was conducted by Rasool et al. (2023), but they only
examined writing anxiety.
To determine classroom speech anxiety, Horwitz et al. (1986) FLCAS model made significant
contributions to the identification and classification of the various anxiety disorders connected to
language acquisition.
Horwitz et al. (1986) divided anxiety and fear into three categories:
1. Anxiety is connected to verbal communication.
2. Test anxiety
3. Fear of a negative evaluation
Verbal communication is the type of anxiety brought on by the expectation that one must be able
to speak well in the target language. Notably, when their language proficiency and knowledge are
lacking, learners frequently feel uncomfortable speaking in the classroom because they believe
their speech will be evaluated. When speaking in the target language is required, learners
experience higher anxiety, which makes them hesitant to engage in verbal conversations and self-
conscious of their language skills (McCroskey, 2015).
Horwitz et al. (1986) defined test anxiety as a particular kind of performance anxiety resulting
from a fear of making a mistake, especially while speaking orally. This nervousness stems from
the fear of not doing well enough on speaking tasks, which are often crucial components of
language assessments and go beyond the test.
Fear of a negative evaluation: This anxiety is about receiving harmful or destructive reviews from
the audience. According to Watson & Friend (1969), this involves a significant concern for other
people's perceptions of you and a fear of receiving negative feedback. This type of anxiety is
experienced by language learners who are overly concerned about being negatively assessed for
their linguistic mistakes, even though making mistakes is a normal part of learning a language.

Research Questions
 What is the prevalence of speech anxiety among English as an Additional Language (EAL)
learners?
 How consistent is speech anxiety across different stages of language learning among EAL
learners?
 What impact do demographic factors have on speech anxiety among EAL learners?
The research aims to investigate three main questions: the prevalence of speech anxiety among
English as an Additional Language (EAL) learners, the consistency of this anxiety across different
language learning stages, and the influence of demographic factors on speech anxiety within this
group.

Literature Review
Speech anxiety in second language acquisition has been a subject of extensive research, given its
profound impact on learners’ proficiency and confidence. The seminal work of Horwitz et al.
(1986) introduced the concept of foreign language anxiety, specifically addressing three central
732 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol. 13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

components: test anxiety, communication comprehension, and fear of negative evaluation. The
literature consistently shows that speech anxiety in second language learning is multifaceted and
deeply rooted in psychological, social, and educational factors.
Watson and Friend (1969) state that people avoid social interaction due to negative evaluations.
This facet of language anxiety, as described by MacIntyre and Gardner (1994), relates to the fear
or apprehension experienced by individuals when expected to communicate in a second language.
They argue that this form of anxiety directly impacts learners' willingness to communicate and can
hinder language development. The apprehension is often rooted in a fear of making errors and
being judged, as supported by Young (1991), who emphasizes the social nature of this anxiety. In
the context of language learning, test anxiety extends beyond general academic anxiety,
encompassing fears specific to language performance evaluations. Aida (1994) focuses on the
relationship between linguistic anxiety and learning Japanese. The study found that test anxiety in
language learning could significantly affect students' performance, particularly in oral
assessments, where spontaneous language use is required. This is consistent with Horwitz et al.’s
(1986) assertion that test anxiety is a distinct form of performance anxiety in language learning.
Watson and Friend (1969) highlight the learners' concern about being negatively judged by others,
especially regarding language competence. Cheng et al. (1999) explored this dimension,
suggesting that fear of negative evaluation can lead to avoidance behaviors, further limiting
language practice and improvement opportunities. Gregersen and Horwitz (2002) extended the
conversation by exploring the physiological manifestations of language anxiety, linking it to
broader theories of anxiety and stress. Their work suggests that physiological responses to anxiety,
such as increased heart rate or sweating, can exacerbate feelings of discomfort.
Recent studies continue to explore these dimensions. For instance, Tercan and Dikilitaş (2015)
conducted a study at a private university preparatory school in Turkey. The findings demonstrate
that a range of factors, including speaking, preparation, question-answering, testing, discussion,
public speaking, and error correction, all contribute to speaking anxiety in English among
university students.
Toubot et al. (2018) conducted a study in Malaysia and revealed that students' speaking anxiety
for EFL was moderate to severe. Another study was conducted in Indonesia by Damayanti and
Listyani (2020) using the Horwitz model. The findings show that students lack competence and
are afraid of making mistakes.
Dewaele and MacIntyre (2014) have examined how these anxieties vary in different learning
environments and among diverse learner populations. They underscore the complexity of these
anxieties, influenced by factors like personality, culture, and teaching methodologies.
Muktiningrum et al. (2024) conducted a study to determine the classroom speech anxiety between
male and female students in Indonesia. Muslim Maros University's English Department students
were chosen as the research sample. Results show that there was a statistically significant
difference in foreign language anxiety levels between male and female students. This study found
that female students experience more anxiety than male students. Student anxiety is primarily
caused by communication apprehension, particularly among female students.
Rasool et al. (2023) conducted a study in the context of UE (Multan) to determine writing anxiety.
The sample of this study was prep-class students in the English language teachers training
department at UE (Multan). The study revealed that students have a fear of negative judgment and
a lack of self-confidence in writing anxiety.
Hussain (2020) found out from 14 English medium schools in Multan that anxiety is affecting the
students’ performance due to the opposite gender. Anwar (2023) conducted a study among English
733 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol. 13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

as an additional language learner at Sardar Bahadur Khan Women's University located in Quetta,
Pakistan. She found out that 1st-semester students have more anxiety issues and panic attacks as
compared to 8th-semester students. Shahbaz (2021) found out in the context of The Women
University Multan that students have classroom writing and speaking anxiety.
Sana et al. (2024) conducted a study on the Impact of Students' Speaking Anxiety on Self-efficacy
at the University Level. The population for that research study was the students of the social
science department at Abdul Wali Khan University, Mardan. The research showed that students
often feel nervous when they speak English in different situations. This nervousness affects their
academic performance, confidence, and participation in classroom activities.
No significant study was conducted to determine speech anxiety in the context of the University
of Education Lahore (Multan). The importance of this research lies in its comprehensive
examination of speech anxiety in the context of learning English as an Additional Language
(EAL). This study holds significant implications and contributions to the academic and practical
aspects of language education. By applying Horwitz et al. (1986) as a framework, this study adds
to our understanding of the psychological factors of learning a language. It provides empirical
evidence on how speech anxiety manifests among EAL learners. It provides insights into the
complicated ways that several factors, including gender, educational background, and semester of
study, influence anxiety levels.

Methodology
This is case study research undertaken at the University of Education Lahore (Multan). Horwitz et
al.’s (1986) foreign language speech anxiety scale was used due to its high value of validity and
reliability. This research holds both quantitative methodologies. FLCAS was modified to meet the
needs of this research. Specific components were removed according to contextual demands, as
the study was conducted in Pakistan's EAL environment. SPSS tested the validity and the
reliability of the scale.

Table 1: Reliability statistics

Scale Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
Likert scale questions for .870 25
speech anxiety

Cronbach alpha of 0.870 suggests that the set of items is internally consistent in measuring aspects
related to classroom speech anxiety. It shows that there is an association between items.
The primary tool for data collection was a questionnaire distributed to English students at the
University of Education (Multan). Google Forms was the source of the distribution of
questionnaires among the enrolled students. There were two sections in the Google Forms. The
first section consisted of structured questions aimed at gathering demographic information. The
second section carries the 25 items of Horwitz et al.’s FLCAS with an open-ended question
designed to elicit qualitative responses regarding personal experiences with speech anxiety. It
included items measuring confidence, nervousness, and anxiety related to speaking English.
Responses were captured on a Likert scale ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree."
At the end of the questionnaire, an open-ended question was asked to get detailed information and
to collect students’ views about speech anxiety in the class.
The quantitative data were analyzed using the statistical software SPSS to determine mean anxiety
levels and variance and to perform cross-tabulation with demographic data. The analysis involved
734 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol. 13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

Assigning numerical values to Likert scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree) responses,
calculating an overall anxiety score for each participant, and performing Chi-square tests to
examine the association between categorical demographic variables and levels of speech anxiety
and calculating descriptive statistics (mean, frequency) for demographic data and anxiety scores.
ANOVA test was performed to assess classroom speech anxiety across different semesters. The
total anxiety score for each participant was calculated by summing these scores. These total scores
were then analyzed to find the average (mean) anxiety score. Thematic analysis was performed on
qualitative responses.
The study followed the ethical guidelines. Participants were informed about the purpose of the
study, and consent was obtained. Confidentiality and anonymity of responses were maintained
throughout the study.

Results and Discussions

The descriptive statistics provide a foundational understanding of the sample demo figures and the
participants' general pattern of speech anxiety. This information sets the stage for more detailed
inferential statistical analyses to explore the relationships between these demographic factors and
speech anxiety levels.
The initial phase of data analysis involved computing descriptive statistics with demographic
variables. The values according to the gender are shown in table 2 and figure 1.

Table 2: Descriptive analysis according to gender

Gender Frequency Per cent Valid percent
Female 45 43.7 43.7
Male 58 56.3 56.3
Total 103 100.0 100.0

In the table 2, out of 103 students, there are more males (56.3%) than females (43.7%). This shows
a slightly higher participation or enrollment of male students in the context being studied. These
statistics offer an overview of the sample characteristics.
To determine the amount of speech anxiety between semesters, responses to questionnaire
questions on a Likert scale were transformed into numerical values ranging from 1 strongly agree
to 5 strongly disagree. The total anxiety score for each participant was calculated by summing
these scores. These total scores were then analyzed for each variable's average (mean) anxiety
score. Variables are gender, background, institute, job, and semester. Inferential statistics were
applied to determine the classroom speech anxiety between the two genders, and the results are
given below in figure 1.
735 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol. 13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

Figure 1: Speech anxiety according to gender

In figure 1, girls (79.02) are more anxious than boys (75.48) in EAL classes. This could be because
girls might take their language learning more seriously or be more open about feeling nervous. It
is also believed that girls and boys experience distinct stress when learning a new language.
After the analysis of speech anxiety according to gender, statistics were applied to get descriptive
values and average speech anxiety scores concerning rural and urban backgrounds. The percentage
of the findings are written in table 3 and figure 2.

Table 3: Descriptive analysis according to background

Background Frequency Per cent Valid Percent
Rural 62 60.2 60.2
Urban 41 39.8 39.8
Total 103 100.0 100.0

Table 3 is based on the students' backgrounds; the majority (60.2%) are from rural areas, while the
minority (39.8%) are from urban areas. This suggests a substantial proportion of rural students in
the cohort.

Figure 2: Speech anxiety according to gender

Compared to urban students, who scored 75.27, students from rural areas, who scored 78.19,
appear more nervous when speaking English. This could be because students in rural areas may
not have as much opportunity to converse or listen to English as students in cities. Moreover, in
rural areas, students are more likely to find it difficult to adjust or that they may not have had as
736 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol. 13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

much experience in settings like classrooms. In cities, the English language is spoken to them, and
they have different exposure in fields of life like shops, TV, and discussions.
Some students study in private institutes, and some in governmental institutes. To identify the
anxiety differences between these two students, statistical analyses were performed to get average
anxiety scores concerning students’ intermediate education from private institutes or government
institutes. Moreover, values are shown in table 4 and figure 3.

Table 4: Descriptive analysis according to the institute

Institute Frequency Per cent Valid Percent
Government 37 35.9 35.9
Private 66 64.1 64.1
Total 103 100.0 100.0

Classroom speech anxiety is influenced by the type of institute they attend; most students are from
private institutes (64.1%), while a smaller portion is from government institutes (35.9%). This
suggests that private institutes have a higher student representation in this study.

Figure 3: Speech anxiety according to the institute

There is a slight difference between students from government schools (77.62) and private schools
(76.70). Maybe it is because government schools vary greatly in how they teach English. It may
be due to a lack of resources compared to private schools. Private schools have smaller classes or
more resources for English learning.
Along with the study, some students do the job. Addressing this query about whether the students
of the University of Education are doing any job or not, description statistics are applied, as shown
in table 5 below. Then, to assess speech anxiety and its association with their job status, inferential
statistics were performed, and the results are shown in figure 4.

Table 5: Descriptive analysis according to the job status

Job Frequency Per cent Valid Percent
No 87 84.5 84.5
Yes 16 15.5 15.5
Total 103 100.0 100.0
737 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol. 13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

In terms of job status, a large majority of the students, 87 out of 103 or 84.5%, do not have a job,
while a smaller group of 16 students are working. This points to the fact that some students focus
on professional careers or financially helping their parents.

Figure 4: Speech anxiety according to job status

Interestingly, students who are working have lower anxiety scores (73.81) than those who are not
working (77.62). Maybe working allows you to use your English in everyday situations, such as
interacting with others or following instructions, which can boost students’ confidence in the
classroom.
Students of the English department were part of this study. Students’ participation in this study
and anxiety levels according to their semester are shown in table 6 and figure 5, respectively.

Table 6: Descriptive analysis according to semester

Semester Frequency Per cent Valid Percent
1.00 24 23.3 23.3
3.00 15 14.6 14.6
5.00 24 23.3 23.3
7.00 40 38.8 38.8
Total 103 100.0 100.0

According to table 6, 23% of students were from 1st semester of the English department, 14%
from the 3rd semester, 23.3% from 5th semester, and 38% from the 7th semester of the department.
Most of the students were from the 7th semester, and the 3rd semester had the lowest value.
738 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol. 13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

Figure 5: Average anxiety score according to semester

This figure shows the variation in speech anxiety among the students of different semesters. EAL
students' attitudes toward speaking English in class fluctuate as their semesters progress. They are
initially anxious in semester 1, which is entirely understandable when you are unfamiliar with
anything. By semester 3, students start to feel a little more at ease, but by semester 5, there is an
unexpected increase in anxiety; perhaps this is because the syllabus is more challenging, or they
have to talk more. However, by semester 7, they appeared to have settled in and were less nervous.

Qualitative Analysis
This process involved categorizing the responses into themes or key topics to identify common
reasons for anxiety that were not previously described in the survey. Twenty-three responses were
collected in response to an open-ended question at the end of the questionnaire. Out of twenty-
three, six responses were about language proficiency. It also shows that research allies with
objectives. Horwitz’s apprehension of verbal communication lies in these reasons. Students were
having concerns about speaking English fluently, forgetting common words, lack of vocabulary,
and difficulty in expressing thoughts in English, as one of the respondents wrote: “I often forget
some words which are very common English words while speaking, I have a good vocabulary, but
I can't speak English fluently”.
Horwitz’s negative evaluation was approved when students wrote: “Judgmental attitude of
listeners” and “hard attitude of professors” as reasons for their communication issues. Some
students come with unique and interesting reasons for their classroom speech anxiety:
I want to speak English regularly, but I have no experience. Let's talk about the
presentation strategy in university. They will not prepare the students for
presentation. They will not provide the students with proper tips for presentation.
But the expectation level of teacher gets very high. A student feels like being
imposed by teacher for this task. Which produces anxiety. That's why the students
have no interest for presentations and without presentation they don't get fluency
in speaking English.
The above Students' responses confirm Horwitz's theory of evaluation anxiety with concerns about
judgmental listeners and professors. Uniquely, some students highlight the link between a desire
to speak English and a lack of experience causing anxiety, while others point to unpreparedness
due to unclear presentation expectations, both of which contribute to students' overall fear of
judgement, lack of confidence, and hesitation when speaking English in class.
The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the nuanced relationship between
demographic factors and speech anxiety among university students. The descriptive statistics
739 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol. 13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

revealed variations in anxiety levels across different demographic variables, such as gender,
background, institute type, job status, and academic semester. For instance, females exhibited
higher levels of anxiety compared to males in English as an Additional Language (EAL) classes,
and students from rural backgrounds demonstrated higher anxiety scores compared to their urban
counterparts. Moreover, variations in anxiety levels were observed across different academic
semesters, with students exhibiting fluctuations in anxiety levels as they progressed through their
semesters. The qualitative analysis further illuminated the factors contributing to speech anxiety,
including language proficiency challenges, fear of judgment, and lack of confidence in
presentation skills. These findings underscore the multifaceted nature of speech anxiety and
emphasize the importance of addressing individual and contextual factors to create a supportive
learning environment conducive to effective communication and academic success.
This study statistically identified variations in speech anxiety among ESL learners. However,
future research can benefit from a more multifaceted approach. A stronger emphasis on
quantitative methods is crucial to establishing a solid foundation for reducing speech anxiety.
Qualitative data from students' and teachers' perspectives would provide valuable insights into
classroom dynamics that contribute to anxiety. Hence, it is suggested that for future research,
qualitative data from teachers and students should be taken in the form of interviews or surveys.

Discussions
This research looked into how anxious students feel when they have to speak English as a second
language. It is found that there is nervousness or speech anxiety in students. There were anxiety
differences among different variables like gender. Females were having anxiety as compared to
males. This finding is similar to Hussain's findings (2020). Hussain (2020) found that gender plays
a vital role in the anxiety level. Similarly, in this research, females have more classroom speech
anxiety as compared to males. It is assumed that gender issues are one of the major causes of
speaking in the classroom.
Through mean anxiety score, it was tested that 1st and 2nd-semester students had almost the same
anxiety, and it decreased in 7th semester, similar to the findings of (Anwar, 2023). According to
Anwar (2023), students have less anxiety than 1st-semester students, and this research statistically
shows that in the final semester, students had less anxiety than their first semester.
The findings of Damayanti and Listyani (2020) about lack of competence and confidence are
similar to the findings of this paper. Respondents of this research paper have judgmental anxiety,
as found by (Rasool et al., 2023). It was noticed that students from the countryside and
governmental colleges feel more anxious than city students and privately educated students in their
intermediate. This might be because they are not used to speaking English daily. It is also assumed
that the private sector has more teaching facilities than the government sector, which could be the
reason for lower anxiety among their students.
It was also found that people who have jobs are less anxious, probably because they get to practice
English more often at work. They may have public dealing experience. Jobholder students have
more exposure than jobless students, which can be the reason for less anxiety in classroom
speaking. So, findings vary according to demographic variables, as found by (Dewaele &
MacIntyre, 2014).
Qualitative responses of this research aligned with the theoretical foundation of this study (Horwitz
et al., 1986). Students' responses were connected to test anxiety, verbal communication anxiety,
and fear of negative evaluation, described in the introduction section of this research paper.
740 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol. 13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

The findings of this study are invaluable for educators and curriculum designers. By identifying
the prevalence and nature of speech anxiety among learners, teachers can develop more effective
strategies to reduce anxiety in the classroom. This may include creating a more supportive and
encouraging learning environment, incorporating activities that build confidence, and using
teaching methods that are empathetic to the anxieties faced by learners. Understanding the roots
of speech anxiety can lead to more supportive classroom practices that encourage student
participation. By mitigating these anxieties, students may become more willing to engage in
speaking activities, leading to improved language proficiency and greater confidence in using the
language.
Statistically, it is proven that there are speech anxiety differences among students. For future
research, it is suggested that qualitative data be taken and suggestions from both students and
teachers be made to remove or minimise classroom speech anxiety in ESL learners.

Conclusion
This study aimed to determine the prevalence and severity of speech anxiety among English
language learners (EAL). This information was meant to help English Language Teaching (ELT)
practitioners develop techniques to reduce and alleviate students' speech anxiety. The fundamental
concept was that reducing or eliminating these fears would considerably improve learners'
speaking skills in the target language, improving their entire educational experiences. By
identifying different types of speech anxiety, teachers can improve their instructional approaches
and nurture higher confidence and skill growth in students' oral language abilities. It is anticipated
that the study's findings will provide significant insights into the field of language instruction,
particularly in improving EAL students' speaking skills.

References
 Aida, Y. (1994). Examination of Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope’s Construct of Foreign Language
Anxiety: The Case of Students of Japanese. The Modern Language Journal, 78(2), 155.
https://doi.org/10.2307/329005
 Anwar, S. (2023). Investigating Factors Causing English Writing Anxiety among Undergraduate
Students of Balochistan, Pakistan. Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review, 7(2).
https://doi.org/10.47205/plhr.2023(7-ii)08
 Cheng, Y., Horwitz, E. K., & Schallert, D. L. (1999). Language Anxiety: Differentiating Writing and
Speaking Components. Language Learning, 49(3), 417–446. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00095
 Damayanti, M. E., & Listyani, L. (2020). An analysis of students’ speaking anxiety in academic
speaking class. ELTR Journal, 4(2), 152–170. https://doi.org/10.37147/eltrj.v4i2.70
 Dewaele, J., & MacIntyre, P.D. (2014). The two faces of Janus? Anxiety and enjoyment in the foreign
language classroom. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 4, 237–274.
https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2014.4.2.5
 Gregersen, T., & Horwitz, E. K. (2002). Language Learning and Perfectionism: Anxious and Non-
Anxious Language Learners’ Reactions to Their Own Oral Performance. The Modern Language
Journal, 86(4), 562–570. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00161
 Hmaid, Y. (2014). The Impact of Teaching Oral Communication Strategies on English Language
Learners in Libya. Dora.dmu.ac.uk. http://hdl.handle.net/2086/10947
 Horwitz, E. (2001). Language anxiety and achievement. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, pp. 21,
112–126. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190501000071
 Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety. The Modern
Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.2307/327317
741 Journal of Asian Development Studies Vol. 13, Issue 1 (March 2024)

 Hussain, S. (2020). A Comparison of Students’ Academic Achievement in English in Single-Sex and

Co-Educational Schools. Review of Economics and Development Studies, 6(2), 645–655.
https://doi.org/10.47067/reads.v6i2.230
 Irsyad, R. F., & Narius, D. (2013). Teaching speaking through retelling stories of cartoon movies at
junior high school. Journal of English Language Teaching, 2(1), 295–301.
https://doi.org/10.24036/jelt.v2i1.2617
 Liu, M. (2006). Anxiety in Chinese EFL students at different proficiency levels. System, 34(3), 301–
316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2006.04.004
 MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1994). The Subtle Effects of Language Anxiety on Cognitive
Processing in the Second Language. Language Learning, 44(2), 283–305.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1994.tb01103.x
 Mccroskey, J. C. (1982). Oral Communication Apprehension: A Reconceptualization. Annals of the
International Communication Association, 6(1), 136–170.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1982.11678497
 Mccroskey, J. C. (2015). An Introduction to Rhetorical Communication. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315663791
 Muktiningrum, N. I., Mahmud, M., & Halim, A. (2024). Speaking Anxiety of Students in EFL
Classroom Based on Gender in Higher Education. Pinisi Journal of Art, Humanity, and Social
Studies, 4(2), 463-474.
 Rasool, U., Qian, J., & Aslam, M. Z. (2023). An investigation of foreign language writing anxiety and
its reasons among pre-service EFL teachers in Pakistan. Frontiers in Psychology, p. 13.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.947867
 Sana. Ghaffar, A., & Irshadullah, H. M. (2024). Effect of Students’ Speaking Anxiety on their Self-
efficacy at University Level. Qlantic Journal of Social Sciences, 5(1), 268–276.
https://doi.org/10.55737/qjss.197546345
 Shahbaz, S. (2021). Investigating English Language Speaking Anxiety and Writing Fear: A Case
Study. Pakistan Social Sciences Review, 5(II), 1089–1100. https://doi.org/10.35484/pssr.2021(5-ii)83
 Tercan, G., & Di̇ ki̇ li̇ taş K. (2016). EFL students’ speaking anxiety: a case from tertiary level
students. ELT Research Journal, 4(1), 16–27. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/eltrj/issue/5485/74474
 Toubot, A. M., Hock Seng, G., & Binti Atan Abdullah, A. (2018). Examining Levels and Factors of
Speaking Anxiety among EFL Libyan English Undergraduate Students. International Journal of
Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 7(5), 47. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.5p.47
 Watson, D., & Friend, R. (1969). Measurement of social-evaluative anxiety. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 33(4), 448–457. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027806
 Woodrow, L. (2006). Anxiety and Speaking English as a Second Language. RELC Journal, 37(3), 308–
328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688206071315
 Yaikhong, K., & Usaha, S. (2012). A Measure of EFL Public Speaking Class Anxiety: Scale
Development and Preliminary Validation and Reliability. English Language Teaching, 5(12).
https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n12p23
 Yan, J. X., & Horwitz, E. K. (2008). Learners’ Perceptions of How Anxiety Interacts With Personal
and Instructional Factors to Influence Their Achievement in English: A Qualitative Analysis of EFL
Learners in China. Language Learning, 58(1), 151–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
9922.2007.00437.x