THE EFFECTS OF GENDER ON WILLINGNESS TO COMMUNICATE AMONG TURKISH EFL LEARNERS

Authors

  • Timothy J. Sinnett Jr. Istanbul Aydin University, Turkey orcid.org/0000-0002-3387-2126
  • Akbar R. Alishah Istanbul Aydin University, Turkey orcid.org/0000-0001-8671-073X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejel.v6i4.3731

Keywords:

communication factors, motivation, confidence, apprehension, personality

Abstract

Effective communication in a foreign language is a captivating area of study for language learners, teachers, and researchers alike. Language learners hope to exemplify characteristics conducive to fruitful communication. Language teachers aim to develop beneficial practices and cultivate an atmosphere where students feel willing to share their ideas, knowledge, and opinions in a foreign language. Language researchers endeavor to describe the ideal conditions and learner characteristics for successful communication. The task of analyzing potential factors in successful communication appears endless, yet each new study helps to construct a more comprehensive understanding of the road map to efficacious second language and foreign language communication. This study explored gender’s impact on Turkish university students’ willingness to communicate in English. Gender’s influence was also evaluated in learners’ self-perceived communicative competence, communication apprehension, and personality. The research participants were taken from four universities in different cities of Turkey. The sample (N=282) was composed of Turkish students in English Language Teaching undergraduate programs. This research employed a hybrid design marrying quantitative data from participant questionnaires and qualitative data from participant interviews. The results of the present research concluded that willingness to communicate differs between male (n=119) and female (n=163) language learners, but not to a significant extent.

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

Author Biographies

  • Timothy J. Sinnett Jr., Istanbul Aydin University, Turkey orcid.org/0000-0002-3387-2126
    Timothy J. Sinnett Jr. is an English Language Teaching graduate student at Istanbul Aydin University. He has been teaching EFL for a decade. His teaching experience in South Korea includes language immersion kindergarten programs and low-income public elementary school programs. In Turkey, he taught university preparatory English and undergraduate ELT classes. He is currently teaching IGCSE and BTEC courses in a private high school in Istanbul.
  • Akbar R. Alishah, Istanbul Aydin University, Turkey orcid.org/0000-0001-8671-073X
    Akbar Alishah received his BA in English Language and Literature from Urmia University, his MA from Tehran University, and his PhD from Gazi University in Ankara, Turkey. His primary research interests include teaching foreign language skills, sociolinguistics, and language testing. He has been working in Istanbul Aydin University as an assistant professor in the ELT department since 2015.

References

Afghari, A., & Sadeghi, E. (2012). The effect of EFL learners' gender and second language proficiency on willingness to communicate. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Translation Studies, 1(1), 49-66. doi: 10.22034/efl.2012.79161

Allen, J., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (1984). Communication in the chiropractic profession, part 1. Journal of Chiropractic, 21, 24-30.

Altıner, C. (2018). Turkish EFL learners' willingness to communicate in English. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 5(1), 40-49. Retrieved from http://ijcer.net/tr/pub/issue/38043/432649

Berger, B. A., Baldwin, H. J., McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1983). Communication apprehension in pharmacy students: A national study. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 47, 95-102.

Booth-Butterfield, M., & Thomas, C. C. (1995). Communication apprehension among secretarial students. Communication Reports, 8, 38-44.

Burgoon, J. K. (1976). The unwillingness-to-communicate scale: Development and validation. Communication Monograph, 43, 60-69.

Cao, Y., & Philp, J. (2006). Interactional context and willingness to communicate: A comparison of behavior in whole class, group and dyadic interaction. System, 34, 480-493.

Cetinkaya, Y. B. (2005). Turkish college students’ willingness to communicate in English as a foreign language. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The Ohio State University.

Chan, B., & McCroskey, J. C. (1987). The WTC scale as a predictor of classroom participation. Communication Research Reports, 4, 47-50.

Chou, Y. (2002). An exploratory study of language learning strategies and the relationship of these strategies to motivation and language proficiency among EFL Taiwanese technological and vocational college students. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Iowa.

Corbin, S. S., & Chiachiere, F. J. (1997). Attitudes toward and achievement in foreign language study. Educational Research Quarterly, 21, 3-13.

Dörnyei, Z., & Clément, R. (2001). Motivational characteristics of learning different target languages: Results of a nationwide survey. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition, 23, 399-432.

Eccles, J., Wigfield, A., Harold, R. D., & Blumenfeld, P. (1993). Age and gender differences in children's self- and task perceptions during elementary school. Child Development, 64, 830-847.

Ehrman, M. E., & Oxford, R. L. (1989). Effects of sex differences, career choice, and psychological type on adult language learning strategies. The Modern Language Journal, 73, 1-13.

Fabrigar, L. R., MacDonald, T. K., & Wegener, D. T. (2005). The structure of attitudes. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 79-124). Erlbaum.

Gholami, L. (2015). Willingness to communicate and its relationship with emotional intelligence and gender differences. International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences, 52, 87-94. doi: 10.18052/www.scipress.com/ILSHS.52.87

Green, J. M., & Oxford, R. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29 (2), 261-297.

Hashimoto, Y. (2002). Motivation and willingness to communicate as predictors of reported L2 use: The Japanese ESL context. Second Language Studies, 20, 29-70.

Jaasma, M. A. (1997). Classroom communication apprehension: Does being male or female make a difference? Communication Reports, 10, 219-228.

Jung. M. A. (2011). Korean EFL university students’ willingness to communicate in English. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Indiana University.

Kang, S. J. (2005). Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language. System, 33, 277-292.

Kaya, M. (1995). The relationship of motivation, anxiety, self-confidence, and extroversion/introversion to students’ active class participation in an EFL classroom in Turkey. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Bilkent University.

Kiziltepe, Z. (2000). Attitudes and motivation of Turkish EFL students towards second language learning. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics, 129(2), 141-168.

Li, H. (2004). Correlations between affective variables and oral performance: Focused on motivation, anxiety, and WTC. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Dankook University.

Licht, B. G., & Dweck, C. S. (1984). Determinants of academic achievement: The interaction of children's achievement orientations with skill area. Developmental Psychology, 20, 628-636.

Li, R. L. (2010). The relationship between speaking anxiety and speaking strategies among university students in Taiwan. [Master’s thesis, National Ping Tong University of Education].

MacIntyre, P. D. (1994). Variables underlying willingness to communicate: A causal analysis. Communication Research Reports, 11, 135-142.

MacIntyre, P. D. (2007). Willingness to communicate in the second language: Understanding the decision to speak as a volitional process. Modern Language Journal, 91, 564-576.

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.

MacIntyre, P. D., Babin, P.A., & Clément, R. (1999). Willingness to communicate: Antecedents and consequences. Communication Quarterly, 47, 215-229.

MacIntyre, P. D., & Carre, G. (2000, July). Personality and willingness to communicate in a second language: A critique of the communibiological approach [Conference presentation]. The seventh international congress on language and social psychology, Cardiff, Wales.

MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Donovan, L. A. (2002). Sex and age effects on willingness to communicate, anxiety, perceived competence, and L2 motivation among junior high school French immersion students. Language Learning, 52, 537-564.

MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern Language Journal, 82, 545-562.

McCroskey, J. C. (1970). Measures of communication-bound anxiety. Speech Monographs, 37, 269-277.

McCroskey, J. C. (1992). Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale. Communication Quarterly, 40, 16-25.

McCroskey, J. C. (1997). Why we communicate the ways we do: A communibiological perspective. Allyn and Bacon.

McCroskey, J. C., & Baer, J. E. (1985). Willingness to communicate: The construct and its measurement [Conference presentation]. The annual convention of the Speech Communication Association, Denver, CO, United States.

McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1987). Willingness to communicate. In J. C. McCroskey & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Personality and interpersonal communication. Sage.

McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1990). Willingness to communicate: A cognitive view. Journal of Behavior and Personality, 5, 19-37.

McCroskey, J. C., Simpson, T. J., & Richmond, V. P. (1982). Biological sex and communication apprehension. Communication Quarterly, 30, 129-133.

Meece, J. L., & Courtney, D. P. (1992). Gender differences in students' perceptions: Consequences for achievement-related choices. In D. Schunk & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 209-228). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Mori, S. and Gobel, P. (2006). Motivation and gender in the Japanese EFL classroom. System, 34, 194-210.

Oxford, R. L., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. Modern Language Journal, 73, 291-300.

Öz, H. (2014). Big five personality traits and willingness to communicate among foreign language learners in Turkey. Social Behavior and Personality. 42 (9), 1473-1482.

Öz, H., Demirezen, M., & Pourfeiz, J. (2015). Willingness to communicate of EFL learners in Turkish context. Learning and Individual Differences. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.12.009

Pappamihiel, N. E. (2002). English as a second language students and English language anxiety: Issues in the mainstream classroom. Research in the Teaching of English, 36, 327-355.

Phillips, G. M. (1965). The problem of reticence. Pennsylvania Speech Annual, 22, 22-38.

Phillips, G. M. (1968). Reticence: Pathology of the normal speaker. Speech Monographs, 35(1), 39-50.

Rahimi, M., Riazi, A., & Saif, S. (2008). An investigation into the factors affecting the use of language learning strategies by Persian EFL learners. CJAL, 11(2), 31-60.

Richmond, V. P., & Roach, K. D. (1992). Power in the classroom: Seminal studies. In V. P.

Richmond & J. C. McCroskey (Eds.), Power in the classroom: Communication, control, and concern (pp. 47-66). Erlbaum.

Smith, T. E. (1997). Adolescent gender differences in time alone and time devoted to conversation. Adolescence, 32, 483-496.

Soimeng Pang, F., & Liu, M. (2006). Students’ perspectives on a school-based English program. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 2, 54-71.

Sy, B. M. (1994). Sex differences and language learning strategies [Paper presentation]. 11th conference of teachers of English to speakers of other language of the Republic of China, Taiwan.

Şener, S., (2014). Turkish ELT students' willingness to communicate in English. ELT Research Journal, 3(2), 91-109.

Tannenbaum, M. & Tahar, L. (2008). Willingness to communicate in the language of the other: Jewish and Arab students in Israel. Learning and Instruction, 18, 283-294.

Teh, K. S. M., Embi, M. A., Rahimi, N. M., Yusoff, N., & Mahamod, Z. (2009). A closer look at gender and Arabic language learning strategies use. European Journal of Social Sciences, 9(3), 399-407.

Valadi, A., Rezaee, A., & Kogani Baharvand, P. (2015). The relationship between language learners’ willingness to communicate and their oral language proficiency with regard to gender differences. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 4(5), 147-153. doi: 10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.5p.147

Wen, W. P., & Clément, R. (2003). A Chinese conceptualization of willingness to communicate in ESL. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 16, 18-38.

Wharton, G. (2000). Language learning strategy use of bilingual foreign language learners in Singapore. Language Learning, 50, 203-243.

Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. Modern Language Journal, 86, 54-66.

Downloads

Published

2021-05-08

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 4 (2021)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

 

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).