Dynamic emotions underlying L2
Willingness to Communicate:
Enjoyment, engagement, andanxiety
Tomoko Yashima
Kansai University

Peter D. MacIntyre
Cape Breton UniversityIntroduction Part 1SU3 OsakaScheduleIntroduction: How we can capture dynamics of emotions
The WTC model, A dynamic perspective & CDST theory
Tomoko Yashima and Peter MacIntyre (10 minutes)

A CDST informed study on Dynamic WTC in the classroom
Tomoko Yashima (15 minutes)

Emergence of WTC in young L2 learners through task-basedlearning
Junko Toyoda & Tomoko Yashima (15 minutes)

Flow and task engagement
Scott Aubrey (15 minutes)

Approaches to language’s dynamic systems: Idiodynamics andexperience sampling.
Peter MacIntyre (15 minutes)

Discussion: Integrating four papers

Peter MacIntyre and Tomoko Yashima (10 minutes)

Audience Q&A (10 minutes)

Willingness to communicate (WTC)
in an L2
readiness to initiate communication at aparticular time and with a specific person orpersons, using a L2 (MacIntyre et al., 1998)

1Layer I

Desire to 3
communicate
with specificperson

Layer IV Interpersonal

Layer V

Layer VI

Crossing the Rubicon
Behavioural Intention [WTC]

L2 Willingness toCommunicate

5EnduringfactorsCommunication Behaviour

2Situated Layer IIfactors
Layer III

L2UseMotivation
8Intergroup
Attitudes

4

State
Communicative
Self-Confidence

6Intergroup
Motivation
9

SocialSituation

7

L2 SelfConfidence

Motivational Propensities

10

Communicative
Competence

11 12Intergroup Climate

Situated Antecedents

Personality

Affective Cognitive Context

Social and IndividualContext
4

A Brief History of WTC Research
1998
Quantitative studies identifying factors that influence
L2 WTC in various contexts (Clément, Baker, & MacIntyre, 2003;
Denies, Yashima, & Janssen, 2015; Khajavy et al., 2014; Peng&Woodrow, 2010; Yashima, 2002; Yashima et al., 2004)
2005
Qualitative studies on situated WTC(Cao, 2011, 2014; Cao & Philp, 2006; Kang, 2005; MacIntyre,Burns, & Jessome, 2011; Peng, 2012

→ Mixed methods→ Dynamic Turn

2011
CDST–informed studies of WTC focusing on dynamics(MacIntyre and Legatto, 2011; Pawlak and MystkowskaWiertelak, 2015; Yashima, MacIntyre, & Ikeda, 2018)

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

References••
•
•
•

•

Peng, J. (2012). Towards an ecological understanding of willingness to communicate inEFL classrooms in China. System, 40, 203-213.

A CDST informed study on
Dynamic WTC in the classroom:
Nested systems and timescales
Tomoko Yashima
Ph.D.
Kansai University
JAPANSU3 Osaka2019

A CDST perspective on the language
classroom“highlights connections across levels of humanand social organization, from individual minds
up to the social-political context of language
learning, and across time scales from minute byminute of classroom activity to teaching andlearning lifetimes”(Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008, p. 198)

WTC of a class community as a dynamicsystem

WTC ofindividuals as
dynamic systems

Nested systems

3WTC as enduring individual trait

Situated dynamic WTC
fluctuating in context

Different time scales

4y focus
How CDST perspectives can uncovern connections between individuals’ WTC andgroup (class) level WTC as nested systems
that co-adapt to each other, andn connections between timescales byconceptualizing trait and state WTC as
representing different, yet interacting
timescales
n dynamics of motions underlying WTC

Ourstudy
Yashima, MacIntyre, & Ikeda, 2018
Yashima, Ikeda, & Nakahira, 2016)

Enhancing WTC
through a design-based study

What is a design based study?
• “deals with complexity by iteratively changing thelearning environment over time—collecting
evidence of the effect of these variations andfeeding it recursively into future design.”• “deliberately introduces ‘noise’ into the system”
and see how the system responds”• “effective when the focus of investigation is not
the outcome of learning but learning processes”(Larsen-Freeman & Cameron (2008:244)

Silence as attractor state in Japanese
EFL classrooms
n King (2013): 48 hours of classroom observation
Students’ self-initiated communication→ 7 minutes, or 0.24%→empirical evidence of a robust trend, with minimal
variation, toward silence” (p. 12) within Japanese
university foreign language classrooms.
A design-based research
to reverse this trend

Removing I-R-F (Initiation-Response-Feedback)and focusing on the dynamics of WTC
We designed a classroom research in which
students participated in discussion sessions over asemester. In this intervention, I-R-F patterns
were avoided and students were encouraged totake the initiative to talk.
Initiation-ResponseFeedback
T: What is the capital ofJapan?
S: Tokyo.
T.: Good!

9Method10

Teaching intervention- 21 Japanese 1st-year university students learning EFL
majored in Foreign Language Studies- a 20-minute discussion session within 90-minute classtime for 12 weeks (Week 2 – 13),

11

Data collection
Before the intervention(a) uestionnaire (trait anxiety, motivation, trait WTC)
During the intervention(b) Audio-recording of each session(c) Observation notes by the TA(d) eflection sheet(assessment of satisfaction, engagement, state anxiety, interest)+ (written retrospective accounts on why they could(not) participate)

12

Data collection
After the intervention(e) Written retrospective accounts(on what they thought during the discussion)
Self-rated how much they prepared for each
discussion on 12 items(f) Stimulated-recall interviews with 3 participants(based on differences in the frequency of talkin the discussion)

13

Data analysis
12 whole-class discussion sessions
Ø Transcribed → discourse analyses
Ø Calculated:
the amount of silence between turns
the amount of talk by the instructor
the amount of talk by the students
the number of utterances by each student
Interviews
Ø Transcribed and open-codedØ Analysed for salient differences btw 3 interviewees
14Results anddiscussion

15

L2 TC and communication behavior
in class and individuals
as Nestedsystems

1. How class-level communication behaviors
emerge and transform

16

Proportion of student talk, teacher talk,and silence during 12 discussion sessions

31

24

25

34

40

25

33

35
55

Proportion
(%)

44

62

57
52

47

48
42

53

66
1930

42

Silence

51

Student talk

33
33

25

1

15

18

2

3

26

14

17

20

4

5

6
7
Time

23

20
98

910

18

11

Figure 1. Proportion of student talk, teacher talk, and silence

Teacher talk

131217Proportion of student talk, teacher talk,and silence during 12 discussion sessions

31242534

40

25

33

3555

Proportion(%)

44

6257
52

47

48
4253

66
193042

Silence

51

Student talk

33
33

25

115

18

2

326

14

17

20

4

5

6
7
Time

23

20
9891018

11

Figure 1. Proportion of student talk, teacher talk, and silence

Teacher talk

13

1218

Time 2
Proportion of student talk: 62%
Topic: How was your first name chosen?
Average length of students’ utterances: 20.21 words
Leadership: Masa’s leadership was quite conspicuous expressing his views frequently, distributing turns
among the other students by asking questions, orreacting to someone else’s opinions
Motivation to start something new: Students were
motivated to start something new and challenging
19

4:30-4:32

Teacher

Don’t be silent. Try to response something.

4:32-4:45

4:45-4:46

Masa

4:46-5:01



5:01-5:04

Students

5:04-5:14

5:14-5:26

MotokiMy parents ... Hope ... to be ... faithful.

5:26-5:33

Teacher

Shall I write your name as well? In Chinese character? Shall I? Yeah?
(looking at Motoki’s nodding his head.) OK.5:33-5:46

5:46-5:47

Masa

5:47-5:52

5:52-6:54

Yuji

((Silence))
I wanna hear Motoki.
((Silence))
Hahaha hahaha (looking at Motoki's reaction)
((Silence))

((Silence))
Who’s going to speak?
((Silence))
My name is decided by my grandfather. And, he is... He wanted me tobecome genera, genera... gene??
(whispering 'generous' in his ear) Taki 6:11-6:15
Generous person. YUJI’s kanji is…[Hahaha hahaha] Students 6:21-6:25
YU means generous. SHI(JI) is ITARU. ITARU, ITARU… ITARU means…
[Hahaha hahaha] Students 6:39-6:41
become ... So … yes.
20

Time 7
Proportion of student talk 19%
Topic: What are the factors in owning a successful
restaurant?
Average length of students’ utterances: 6.24 words
Lack of leadership: Masa did not exhibit the leadership in
this session he demonstrated at Time 2.
Air of tiredness: Students showed signs of tiredness after
a month or so of excitement and high motivation to learn
at the beginning of a new semester or school life. Studentroles in the class (those who talked or did not talk) were
somewhat fixed.
21

Time 9Proportion of student talk: 66%
Topic: What is your type of Multiple Intelligence?
Average length of students’ utterances: 17.09 words
Adaptation to lack of leadership: Masa was absent.
Taki, a constant contributor to the discussions, triggereda Question and Answer chain.
To this, other students responded and took turns toexpress their views.
22

L2 TC and communication behavior
inclassandgroup
As nestedsystems

2. How individuals’ communication behaviors
emerge and transformInterviewees with:Taki (actively participated in discussions)
Nachi (spoke occasionally: approx. once each time)
Oto (kept mostly silent -spoke only once)
23

Student

TOEFL
ITP

Total N ofutterances(self-selected)

Traitanxiety

WTC
(L1)

WTC
(L2)

Taki

487

40(33)

2.33

4.75

4.75

Nachi

487

12(9)

4.67

5.75

2.75

Oto

490

1(0)

5.67

3.50

3.50

Class
Mean

469.06

21.9

4.23

4.24

3.72

Norm
(N=265)

n.s.

n.s.

4.35

4.41

2.95

Ryan
(2008)

n.s.

n.s.

4.09

4.04

1.89
24

Taki• Low trait anxiety, High WTC both in L1 and L2,• Previous experiences of communication in English(many communication-focused English courses)(1-year study abroad as a part of curriculum)• Felt responsibility to get the discussion moving• Hated to see herself monopolizing the discussion
ut I agree with Yaya and Masa’s• Used expressions to relate to others
opinion….
• Contributed frequently to discussion s Shiki said, I think……

25

Nachi: “I was frightened to participate in thediscussion, though I wanted to saysomething.”• High trait anxiety• Gap btw. high L1 WTC and low L2 WTC (5.25 vs. 2.75)• Preparationfor the class• Confidence increased in speaking L2• Close fiends’ contribution to the discussion stimulated her
It was very hard to be the one who breaks
the silence.
• Contributed to the discussions approx. once every time
• Lowered anxiety
26

Oto• Relatively low WTC in both L1 and L2 (3.50)• High trait anxiety (esp. bout accuracy and small voice)• Surprised by “very fluent” peers
Difficult topics for her
Listening to others discussion helped• Worry about small voice
her understand the contents of the•decided to) remain silent

textbook

However…
• Change in attitudes(less anxious about accuracy)27

A class community as a dynamic, nested
systemIndividuals as dynamic
systems
individuals’ reactions
create the classroom context
that influences individuals’
reactions

The context includes: the topic of discussion, the teacher,classmates (who are absent), seating arrangement, the discourse
they themselves create, e.g., speech-silence patterns they create 28

A class community as a dynamic, nested
systemhe classroom contextinfluences individuals’
reactions that create theclassroom context

The context includes: the topic of discussion, the teacher,classmates (who are absent), seating arrangement, the discourse
they themselves create, e.g., speech-silence patterns they create 29

Dynamics ofemotions

Situated Anxiety
9876

Oto

5Taki
4Nachi
Class

3

2

10
12

3

4

5

6

7

Nervousness/Anxiety

89

10

1112

12

Engagement

108

Oto
Taki

6Nachi
Class

4

20

1234

567

engagement

89

101112

12Interest

108

Oto
Taki

6NachiClass4201234567interest

89101112

12Satisfaction

108OtoTaki

6NachiClass420

1234567

Satisfaction

89101112Connections
between different
timescales

Situated and trait-like WTC/ anxiety
as different timescalesSituated Anxiety
9876Oto

5Taki
4Nachi
Class

32

10
12

3

4

5

6

7

Nervousness/Anxiety

89101112

Looking at WTC /anxiety
on different time lenses
The average of situated anxiety (assessed 12 times)
moderately correlates with trait-like language
anxiety (r= .54)
and highly with communication anxiety (assessedusing PRCA) (r= .70)
Trait-like L2 WTC accounts for part of situatedperformance, nd hopefully enhancing situated L2
WTC may lead to higher long-term trait-like L2
WTC... more constant L2 use…

Conclusion
A CDST-informed, design-based study canilluminate:• Dynamics of emotions of both individuals andthe community that individuals constitute,and how they interact as nested systems• Situated, fluctuating emotions, and how
situated and trait-like emotions operate atdifferent time scalesReferences•••••