Comparing Extrovert/Introvert EFL learners in terms of using socio-affective strategies in developing four language skills of speaking, listening, reading, and writing
الموضوعات :
1 - Tabriz
الکلمات المفتاحية: Personality, Extrovert, Introvert, strategy, Socio affective.,
ملخص المقالة :
personality is one of the essential factors to acquire a second language. The Socio-affective strategy helps learners to adjust emotions and motivations. This study investigated the impact of extroversion and introversion on the using socio-affective strategies. The participants of the study were 26 EFL Iranian students at university level at Islamic Azad University, Tabriz Branch. The students who were willing to participate were selected from BA/MA/PhD classes. This descriptive quantitative study used two questionnaires. First, the researcher administered the personality questionnaire developed by Cain (2011) to categorize students into two groups of introvert and extrovert. Next, the socio-affective questionnaire was answered by students. The results of the statistical analyses revealed that there is a significant difference between introverts and extroverts in using socio-affective strategies and the mean score of introverts is higher than extroverts. Also, the results of this study revealed that there is a significant difference between introverts and extroverts in using socio-affective strategy in writing skill. The finding of the study suggests implications regarding the use of socio-affective strategies in introverts and extroverts.
Anaraki, S. S., Zareian, G., &Khodaee, M. (2015, April). Socio-affective strategy use among Iranian tertiary level students. Paper presented at the First Conference in Challenges in Foreign Language Teaching in Iran (CFLTI 2015), Sabzevar, Iran.
Babai, H., Sadeghi, K. (2009). Characteristics of an effective English language teachers as perceived by Iranian teachers and learners of English. English language teaching, 24, 130-143.
Cain, S. (2011). The power of introverts. Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/quiet-the-power-introverts/201103/quiz-are-you-introvert-or-extrovert-and-why-it-matters.
Chastain, K. (1975). Affective and ability factors in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 25, 153-161.
Dorney, Z. (2005). The Psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds), The Handbook of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, 525-551.
Gazzaniga, M. S., & Heatherton, T. F. (2002). Psychological science: Mind, brain, and behavior. New York City: W.W. Norton & Co.
Griffiths, C. (2010). Strategies of successful language learners. Journal of English Language Studies, 1 (3), 1-18. http://www.sid.ir/en/VEWSSID/J_pdf/1032120100301.pdf
Jung, C. G. (1921/1971). PsychologischeTypen. Zürich: Rascher.
Kayaoglu, M.N. (2013). Impact of extroversion and introversion on language learning behaviors. Social Behavior and Personality, 41(5), 819-826. http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.5.819
Lahey, J. (2013). Introverted kids need to learn to speak up at school. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/02/introverted-kids-need-to-learn-to-speak-up-at-school/272960/.
Laney, M. O. (2002). The introvert advantage: How to thrive in an extrovert world. New York:Workman Publishing.
Lestari, A., Sada, C., &Suhartono, L. (2013). Analysis on the relationship of extrovert -introvert personality and students' speaking performance. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan PembelajaranUntan, 4(3).
MacIntyre, P. D., Babin, P. A., & Clément, R. (1999). Willingness to communicate: Antecedents and consequences. Communication Quarterly, 47, 215-229.
Marashi, H., &Naddim, R. (2019). Using information gap and opinion gap tasks to improve introvert and extrovert learners’ speaking. Applied Research on English Language, 8(2), 187-206. Doi: 10.22108/are.2019.113273.1371.
McCrae, R. R., &Costa, P. T. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, 2, 139-153.
Nussbaum, E. M. (2002). How introverts versus extroverts approach small-group argumentative discussions. The Elementary School Journal, 102(3), 183-197. doi:10.1086/499699.
O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A.U., & Walker, C. (1987). Some applications of cognitive theory to second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston: Heinle&Heinle.
Pritchard, D. F. L. (1952). An investigation into the relationship between personality traits and ability in modern languages. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 22(2), 147-148. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1952.tb02817.x.
Rossier, R. (1976). Extroversion-introversion as a significant variable in the learning of oral English as a second language. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Southern California, United States.
Scimonelli, P. (2002). Language learning strategies: Helping the students find ''il metodo''. Institute for language education: Main assignment, Norwich. Retrieved from http://web.tiscalinet.it/colabianchi/NorwichSITE/BRUNA%20main%20assign.-%20LLS.doc.
Silverman, L. (2012). Introversion and giftedness. Denver, Colorado: Gifted Development Center in Denver, Colorado.
Stern, H. H., (1992). Issues and options in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The Journal of English Language Pedagogy and Practice
Vol. 17, No.34, Spring and Summer 2024
DOI: 10.71586/jal.2024.05201120394
Research Article
Comparing Extrovert/Introvert EFL Learners in Terms of Using Socio-Affective Strategies in Speaking, Listening, Reading, and Writing
Hamed Ghorbani Asl
Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
hamedghorbaniasl@yahoo.com
(Received: 2024/05/20; Accepted: 2024/11/26)
Online publication: 2024/12/17
Abstract
Learners’ personality is one of the influential factors in second language acquisition. The Socio-affective strategy helps learners to adjust emotions and motivations. This study investigated the impact of extroversion and introversion on the using socio-affective strategies. The participants of the study were 26 Iranian EFL students at university level at Islamic Azad University, Tabriz Branch. The students who were willing to participate were selected from BA/MA/PhD classes. This descriptive quantitative study used two questionnaires. First, the researchers administered the personality questionnaire developed by Cain (2011) to categorize students into two groups of introvert and extrovert. Next, the socio-affective questionnaire was answered by students. The results of the statistical analyses revealed that there is a significant difference between introverts and extroverts in using socio-affective strategies and the mean score of introverts is higher than that of extroverts. Also, the results of this study revealed that there is a significant difference between introverts and extroverts in using socio-affective strategies in writing skill. The finding of the study suggests implications regarding the use of socio-affective strategies by introverts and extroverts.
Keywords: personality, extrovert, introvert, strategy, socio affective
Introduction
In this age of globalization, English as an international language has been the most important language. People in non-English speaking countries learn English because of their interests, academic requirements, and migration. But why do some students feel that they are not good at learning a second language and they give up continuing it? Dropping out of learning English can be affected by several factors, one of which is students’ personalities that sometimes are not considered by teachers. In line with recent conceptions, Oxford (1990) stated that one of the most important purposes in foreign language learning and teaching process is to consider personal differences. Gazzaniga and Heatherton (2002) stated personality includes behaviors, thoughts, and feelings so each person is unique. According to McCrae and Costa (1999), five major traits namely Openness, Conscientiousness, Agreeable, Neuroticism, and Extraversion underline personalities. Extroversion and introversion may be the most well-known personality traits of the Big Five.
These differences sometimes inhibit or encourage students to learn because a lot of teachers teach students in the same class with the same method. Ellis (1994) declares that there is a hypothesis that extroverts are good at interpersonal communication and introverts are good at cognitive abilities. Similarly, Dorney (2005) states that “both extroversion and introversion may have positive features depending on the particular task in question” (p.26-27).
Besides, learning strategies are one of the main factors that help learners to enhance their learning or learn a foreign language successfully (Oxford, 1990). Oxford (1990) mentions that language learning strategies are a technique that learners use to make it easier for them to understand, remember, retrieve, and apply the information in a second or foreign language. According to Stern (1992), "the concept of learning strategy is dependent on the assumption that learners consciously engage in activities to achieve certain goals and learning strategies can be regarded as broadly conceived intentional directions and learning techniques."(p. 261).
O’Malley, Chamot, and Walker (1987) classify the strategies into three types; they are meta-cognitive, cognitive, and socio-affective. Therefore, besides their knowledge, students’ specific strategies, such as socio-affective, may push them forward to manipulate other aspects in the classroom environment. In particular, socio-affective strategies are the strategies that help students to adjust and control motivations, emotions, and attitudes toward learning, as well as help students to learn through communication or interaction with others.
Generally, interaction occurs between teachers and students, and most of the class time is spent taking or giving oral feedback or oral discussions. Introverts are attentive to meaning and context, so they are slow to start a conversation. In another study on the impact of personality on language learning, Ellis (2004) describes studies that extroverts perform oral language better than introverts. Hence introverts cannot participate in the class discussions as much as extroverts; so, they lose their opportunities to learn. Furthermore, teachers’ lack of awareness in this regard is a potential problem as it might lead to different views and behaviors toward learners’ capability in learning, so they ignore the introvert students considering them unmotivated to learning due to their lack of interaction in the class. Therefore, this problem should be given due attention in second language pedagogy because students ought to have equal opportunities to get involved in their learning process whether extroverted or introverted.
There is a vast amount of literature on the effect of personality traits on learning L2.Many studies have shown that there is a positive correlation between extrovert personality and second language learning. Pritchard (1952) found that there was a positive correlation between extroversion and scores of a second language fluency test. Chastain (1957) stated that extroverts were more successful in language learning. Some studies have focused on student’s personality and their learning processes with different variables. For example, Rossier (1976) tested Spanish students of English as a second language at the high school level. He focused on their oral English skills. He found that extrovert students develop their language proficiency better than introverts. Marashi and Naddim (2019) compared the effect of the information gap and opinion gap task on introvert and extrovert EFL learners’ speaking. The result indicated that extroverts benefited more from opinion gap tasks, the introverts performed much better in the information gap than the extroverts.
Most studies have tended to focus on the effect of personality traits on language acquisition in a specific skill or students using strategies; for instance, Lestari (2013) studied the relationship between personality and using strategies. However, to the best knowledge of the researcher, there have been few studies, if any, comparing extroverts and introverts regarding the use of socio-affective strategies in four language skills of speaking, writing, reading and listening. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine whether there is any significant difference between extrovert/introvert EFL learners and their socio-affective strategy used in each skill.
Introversion and Extroversion
Introversion is a type of personality that focuses on internal feelings and behavior. Introverts tend to stay away from other people and they have few friends. They avoid getting involved in social activities. Extroverts can be categorized as closed-minded; it means that this group of people prefer to do all the works alone instead of staying in a group. They are slow in speaking because they process or focus more on their thoughts before talking. They seek deeper conversation. Laney (2002) stated that an introvert is a kind of character which orientates to emotion, impressions, and ideas.
Contrary to this, Extrovert is a type of character which orientates to people, activities, and things out of the individual (Laney, 2002). Extroverts tend to be involved with a group of people because they prefer to spend more time with people. They are categorized as open-minded. Maclntyre, Babin, and Clement (1999) stated that extroverts have the tendency to interact with others, be outgoing and receive self-esteem from other people. They gain information by being oriented toward the outer world of people, things, or events.
Socio-affective Strategies
Learners feel a sense of anxiety in an English class more than they are in a class in their mother tongue, so learners can use socio-affective strategies to reduce anxiety. Socio-affective strategies are related to learners’ feelings and self-control. They help learners to achieve self-confidence and cooperate with others. Griffiths (2010) defines socio-affective strategies as the “activities consciously chosen by learners to regulate their language learning” (p.1).
Affective strategies are related to some activates such as knowing about anxiety, speaking about emotions or feelings, and rewarding for appropriate activities. Learners use affective strategies to reduce their anxiety, give motivation to them, and encourage themselves. According to Oxford (1990), affective strategies play an important role in the achievement or defeat of learners.
Language Skills
Language skills are abilities that allow you to interact with people and convey your thoughts coherently. The four basic language skills are speaking skills, writing skills, listening skills and reading skills.
Speaking: Brown (1994) defined speaking as producing auditory signals to produce different verbal responses in listeners. In line with this statement, Burns and Joyce (1997) state that speaking is an interactive process of making meaning that includes producing, receiving, and processing information. It is regarded as combining sounds systematically to form meaningful sentences.
Writing: According to White (1986) writing is the process of expressing the ideas, information, knowledge, or experience and understands the writing to acquire the knowledge or some information to share and learn.
Listening: Listening involves receiving sound, understanding the message conveyed in the sounds you hear, evaluating the message, and responding to it. People with good listening skills can excel at comprehending what they hear and responding appropriately.
Reading: Reading is perpetual developmental ability that is to receive and to interpret the encoded information of the written texts. In fact, it occurs while the readers are extracting and to integrate the different types of text contents and then to combine them with their prior knowledges which have been stored in their memories. It is an active and also a complex procedure in which it involves to understand the reading texts and to interact with them and to interact with the writer’s intensions and their purposes to write the text.
So far, numerous studies have been conducted attempting to examine the role of personalities in learning; however, none of them focused on the role of personality in using socio- affective strategies. Accordingly, the present study was prompted to answer the following questions. 1) Is there a significant difference between Introvert/Extrovert EFL learners in terms of using socio-affective strategies in four language skills? .2) Is there a significant difference between Introvert/Extrovert EFL learners in terms of using socio-affective strategies in speaking skill? .3) Is there a significant difference between Introvert/Extrovert EFL learners in terms of using socio-affective strategies in writing skill? .4) Is there a significant difference between Introvert/Extrovert EFL learners in terms of using socio-affective strategies in reading skill? .5)Is there a significant difference between Introvert/Extrovert EFL learners in terms of using socio-affective strategies in listening skill?
Method
Participants
The participants of the study were 26 EFL students including 10 males and 16 females at the university level within the age range of 22 to 40 studying at Islamic Azad University, Tabriz branch. The students were at BA/MA/Ph.D in Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL). classes. BA students were in their last year of studies but the MA and Ph.D. students were freshmen. Based on convenience sampling, the questionnaire was distributed to 40 students and 26 of them returned the questionnaire. In BA classes, six students, in MA class, 15 students and in the Ph.D. class, seven students returned the questionnaire.
Instruments
The first instrument of this study was the psychological questionnaire designed by Cain (2011) including 20 questions (www.psychologytoday.com) taken from the book series Quiet. The reliability of the psychological questionnaire was previously reported by Cain. (2011), who measured the reliability by Kuder-Richardson (KR-21) and was reported to be 0.87 and the content validity of the psychological questionnaire was checked by two professors at Azad university, Tabriz. It showed that the result of the questionnaire was an acceptable level of reliability in terms of their internal consistency. This questionnaire helped the researcher to classify students into two groups of Extrovert students and Introvert students. Extraversion and introversion are regularly seen as a solitary continuum, so to be high in one necessitates being low in the other. Carl Jung give an alternate point of view and recommend that everybody has both an extraverted side and an independent side, with one being more overwhelming than the other. In this study the researcher focused on the overwhelming part of participants. Students just chose yes or no for each question. If the students answered yes to more than 10 of these 20 questions, they were classified as introverts. However, if they answered yes to less than 10 of these 20 questions, they were classified as extroverts. The average time taken to complete the questionnaire was 15 minutes. The following sentence is a sample questionnaire item, item 2 is, I often prefer to express myself in writing (see appendix A).
The second instrument was the socio-affective questionnaire including 38 questions adopted from Anaraki, Zareian, and Khodaee (2015). The content validity of the socio-affective questionnaire was checked by two experts. The two experts were professors of the university. According to Anaraki et al. (2015), the reliability of the questionnaire estimated by Cronbach’s Alpha is 0.85. The result indicated the high internal reliability of the questionnaire. This questionnaire Uses Likert scale at which five points represent certain response; Point 1 is “never or almost never true of me”, point 2 is “usually not true of me”, point 3is “somewhat true of me”, point 4 is “usually true of me”, and point 5 is “always or almost always true of me”, and the questions were divided into four groups (speaking, writing, reading, listening). Each group has 2 types of questions; the first part of them is related to social strategy and the second part is related to affective strategy. Students answered these questions by filling out the response (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5) from never to always. The average time taken to complete the questionnaire was 30 minutes. The following sentence is a sample questionnaire item, item 1 is when I speak English, I ask English speakers or my classmates to correct me (see appendix B).
Procedure
The researcher attended the BA, MA, and Ph.D. classrooms at the university and distributed the questionnaire. First, the researcher administered the personality questionnaire to the students. The researcher postponed giving the second questionnaire because many researchers have suggested that if the number of questions increases, students will not be able to concentrate well so the validity and reliability of questions are decreased. After two weeks, the researcher administered the second questionnaire to those who returned the personality questionnaire. The socio-affective questionnaire was answered by the students. The collected data were analyzed via the Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS). Then the researcher used descriptive statistics to find Mean and Standard deviation and used independent samples t-test to find out whether a significant difference between extroverts and introverts exists or not.
Data Analysis
In order to analyze the collected data and answer the research questions, the researcher used SPSS for further analysis. Independent samples t-test was used to find out whether there is a statistically significant difference between the two groups of extrovert/introvert EFL learners in terms of socio-affective strategy use in each language skill.
Results
First, the descriptive statistics of the mean and standard deviation for the introverted/extroverted students’ use of socio-affective strategies are presented. Table 1 presents the results of descriptive statistics related to the socio-affective strategies questionnaire.
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics Related to the Socio-Affective Strategies
| Style | N | Mean | Std.Deviation | Std.Error Mean |
Socio-affective | Introvert Extrovert | 16 10 | 131.19 118.50 | 12.875 10.233 | 3.219 3.236 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 1 shows that the average use of socio-affective strategies in introverted students is more than extroverts. Before using the independent samples t-test, the researcher had to check the normality condition of the scores. Table 2 shows the results of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of normality for introverts’ scores.
Table 2
The Results of The Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test of Normality for Introverts
|
| Socio-Affective |
| |
N Normal Parameters
Most Extreme Differences
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) |
Mean Std.Deviation Absolute Positive Negative
| 16 131.19 12.875 .141 .141 -.103 .562 .910 |
| |
As the results in Table 2 indicate, the significance level in introverts’ socio-affective score is higher than the p-value of .05 (p=.910 >.05) indicating the normal distribution of the data.
Table 3 shows the results of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of normality for the extroverts’ scores.
Table 3
The Results of The Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test of Normality for Extroverts
|
| Socio-Affective |
| |
N Normal Parameters
Most Extreme Differences
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) |
Mean Std.Deviation Absolute Positive Negative
| 10 118.50 10.233 .181 .181 -.163 .571 .900 |
| |
As the results in Table 3 indicate, the significance level in extroverts’ socio-affective score is higher than the p-value of .05 (p=.900 >.05) indicating the normal distribution of the data. As the normality of the data distribution was confirmed, an independent samples t-test was used to compare the mean scores of the introvert and extrovert students in the use of socio-affective strategies.
Table 4
Independent Samples t-test
| Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances |
|
|
|
|
t-test for Equality of Means |
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 95% Confidence Internal of the Difference | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|
F |
Sig |
t |
df |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
Mean Difference |
Std. Error Difference |
Lower |
Upper | ||||||||||||||||||
Socio-Affective | Equal Variances assumed Equal Variances not assumed | 1.777 | .195 | 2.633 2.780 | 24 22.439 | .015 .011 | 12.688 12.688 | 4.818 4.564 | 2.743 3.233 | 22.632 22.142 | ||||||||||||||||||
As shown in Table 4, the difference between the mean scores turned out to be significant (t=2.63, p=.015<.05) in four skills. Thus, the null hypothesis, regarding question number 1, was rejected and the alternative hypothesis, there is a significant difference between Introvert/Extrovert EFL learners in terms of using Socio-affective strategies in four skills was supported.
Finally, the researcher used descriptive statistics in SPSS to compare the means of the two groups for each skill. Table 5 displays the descriptive statistics of introverts and extroverts’ scores on using socio-affective strategies for each language skill.
Table 5
Descriptive Statistics Related for Socio-Affective Strategies Use in Language Skills
| Style | N | Mean | Std.Deviation | Std.Error Mean |
Speaking
Listening
Reading
Writing | Introvert Extrovert Introvert Extrovert Introvert Extrovert Introvert Extrovert | 16 10 16 10 16 10 16 10 | 29.69 27.20 31.12 29.20 33.19 31.40 37.19 30.70 | 3.719 2.486 4.978 4.264 5.023 4.858 3.885 3.889 | .930 .786 1.245 1.348 1.256 1.536 .971 1.230 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 5 shows that the average use of socio-affective strategy among introverted students is more than extroverts for each skill (Means).
A pre-required assumption for using the independent samples t-test is the normal distribution of the data. The researcher had to make sure that the two groups of learners were homogeneous. Therefore, the normality condition of the scores was checked in SPSS. Table 6 shows the results of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of normality for the introverts’ scores in using socio-affective strategies in four language skills.
The Results of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test of Normality for Introverts
|
| Speaking | Listening | Reading | Writing | |
N Normal Parameters
Most Extreme Differences
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) |
Mean Std.Deviation Absolute Positive Negative
| 16 29.69 3.719 .136 .136 -.126 .543 .929 | 16 31.12 4.978 .118 .118 -.104 .471 .980 | 16 33.19 5.023 .144 .136 -.144 .576 .894 | 16 37.19 3.885 .180 .101 -.180 .718 .681 | |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
As the results in Table 6 indicate, the significance levels in socio-affective scores are higher than the p-value of .05 (p=.929, .980, .894, .681 >.05) indicating the normal distribution of the scores.
Table 7 shows the results of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of normality for the extroverts’ scores in using socio-affective strategies in four language skills.
Table 7
The Results of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test of Normality for Extroverts
|
| Speaking | Listening | Reading | Writing | |
N Normal Parameters
Most Extreme Differences
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) |
Mean Std.Deviation Absolute Positive Negative
| 10 27.20 2.486 .268 .174 -.268 .847 .469 | 10 29.20 4.264 .244 .130 -.244 .773 .589 | 10 31.40 4.858 .171 .167 -.171 .540 .933 | 10 30.70 3.889 .169 .169 -.131 .535 .937 | |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
As the results in Table 3.7 indicate, the significance levels in the socio-affective scores are higher than the p-value of .05 (p=.469, .589, .933, .937 >.05) indicating the normal distribution of the scores.
Accordingly, the data were accepted, the data distribution was normal. Therefore, the researcher used an independent samples t-test for the data related to the use of socio-affective strategies in each language skill. Table 8 presents the respective results.
Table 8
Independent Samples t-test
Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances |
|
|
|
|
t-test for Equality of Means |
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 95% Confidence Internal of the Difference | ||||||||||||||||||
|
|
F |
Sig |
t |
df |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
Mean Difference |
Std. Error Difference |
Lower |
Upper | |||||||||||||||||
Speaking | Equal Variances assumed Equal Variances not assumed | 3.145 | .089 | 1.864 2.043 | 24 23.822 | .075 .052 | 2.488 2.488 | 1.335 1.217 | -.267 -.026 | 5.242 5.001 | |||||||||||||||||
Listening | Equal Variances assumed Equal Variances not assumed | .097 | .758 | 1.011 1.049 | 24 21.504 | .322 .306 | 1.925 1.925 | 1.904 1.835 | -2.004 -1.885 | 5.854 5.735 | |||||||||||||||||
Reading | Equal Variances assumed Equal Variances not assumed | .006 | .940 | .894 .901 | 24 19.753 | .380 .378 | 1.788 1.788 | 2.000 1.984 | -2.341 -2.355 | 5.916 5.930 | |||||||||||||||||
Writing | Equal Variances assumed Equal Variances not assumed | .157 | .695 | 4.141 4.140 | 24 19.240 | .000 .001 | 6.488 6.488 | 1.567 1.567 | 3.254 3.210 | 9.721 9.765 | |||||||||||||||||
As shown in Table 8, the difference between the mean scores turned out to be significant (t=4.14, p=.000<.05) in writing skill. Thus, the null hypothesis, regarding question number 3, was rejected and the alternative hypothesis, there is a significant difference between Introvert/Extrovert EFL learners in terms of using socio-affective strategies in writing skill was supported. It was, also, indicated that there was no significant difference between the extroverts and introverts regarding the use of socio-affective strategies in speaking, t (24) = 1.864, p= .075<.05, listening, t (24) = 1.011, p= .322<.05, and reading, t (24) = .894, p= .380<.05.
Discussion
The present study aimed to compare extroverts and introverts regarding the use of socio-affective strategies in four language skills of speaking, writing, reading and listening. In this section, the researcher discusses some important findings dealing with the students’ personalities and students’ using the socio-affective strategy. The introverts tend to use more socio-affective strategy, in comparison with the extroverts, based on the results of the questionnaire. A reasonable explanation of this finding could be the fact that introverted students are good at writing skills which can be used by teachers to encourage their active participation in class activities. For introverts using socio affective in writing helps them to control the process of language learning where they can apply these strategies to structure their thoughts and emotions without the immediacy of social interaction. So, they manage anxiety and foster a positive attitude towards the language learning process (Mantiri, 2015). The finding of this study may be due to some of the introverts’ personal characteristics that the extroverts lack, such as being careful, having more concentration in their solitude, and ability to generate many more ideas.
This result of the study was similar to the study by Kayaoglu (2013) which indicated that introverted students use all strategies more than extroverts. Scimonelli (2002) contends that affective strategy helps learners to overcome stress and anxiety so learners manage their feelings in a positive environment. Besides, the results of the present study demonstrated that there was a statistically significant difference between the Introvert/Extrovert EFL learners and their socio-affective strategy use in writing skill. Introverts use more affective strategy which serves to reduce anxiety or regulate emotion, motivation, attitudes, and self-encouragement with writing skill compared to extroverts. The result of this study might be related to Silverman (2012) who pointed introverts take all negative feelings home.
The results of this study are also in line with that of Callahan (2000). It has been reported that writing for extroverted learners seem to lag behind speaking, whereas, introverts are better at expressing themselves through writing rather than speaking. As it is obvious, most of the studies revealed that introverts significantly outperformed extroverts in writing. It is important that not only teachers but also curriculum designers consider personality types.
Lahey (2013) stated that there are ways that encourage introverted students to participate in class and give or take feedback than speak up in class. She mentioned that teachers should work with students one-on-one, offering strategies for participation and give positive feedback to them. A reasonable explanation of this finding could be the fact that introverted students prefer to give or take feedback or express their feeling through writing.
Besides talking about the use of socio-affective strategies by introverts and extroverts, one important thing that should be considered is the role of the teacher in the classroom. Teachers play an important role to develop socio-affective strategy in class and make a positive atmosphere. Therefore, it is recommended that teachers should specify students’ personalities as introvert/extrovert and since personality is invisible, teachers can recognize it through questionnaires. Another task for the teacher is to involve introverted students in the class discussion through some strategies.
Another researcher whose idea backs the current study's findings is Saracalolu, Yenice, and Karasakalolu (2009) who studied the relationship between classroom participants' socio-affective strategies and problem-solving skills and their proficiency level. The participants were 50 males and females. The findings demonstrated a significant and positive relationship between participants' overall socio-affective strategies, problem-solving abilities, and English proficiency.
Similarly, the study by Laney (2002) aligns with the current research findings. He states that an introvert has high levels of dopamine. Therefore, they do not need much interaction to relax without stress or depression. Researchers agree with this statement. This makes it very clear why introverted students do not like crowded places and prefer to spend their time reading or writing about their feelings.
This result is in line with (Ellis, 2008; Sanjaya & Mokhtar, 2015) who found that introvert students spend more time for writing than extrovert students. They also found evidently observed that some Indonesian EFL teachers and students have this assumption that introverts may perform better in conceptual tasks (i.e., writing) than extroverts when there is no requirement of oral performance and interactions. Moreover, (Ellis, 2008) found that introvert students are better at developing cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP) than extroverts because many introvert students spit up more time for reading, writing, and trying to produce accurate language. CALP is the students’ ability to understand and express in both written and oral modes, concepts, and ideas that are relevant to success (Cummins, 2008).
Moreover, Qanwal and Ghani (2019) also support the findings of this study arguing that introverts are better learners of ESL writing skills as compared to the extrovert especially in vocabulary, expression, and content because they express their thoughts and feelings through writing. It is maybe because of the character of introvert students who think best themselves and processing ideas in their own mind well.
The findings of this study offer valuable insights for educators and curriculum developers in the field of English as a Foreign Language (EFL). The preference of introverted learners for socio-affective strategies in writing underscores the importance of considering individual personality traits when designing instruction and support strategies in language learning. This study may be useful for teachers to adapt instructional methods that foster reflective and individual engagement. Activities that encourage journaling, personal narratives, and peer feedback in writing can be particularly effective. Such tasks allow introverts to express their thoughts and emotions while remaining in their comfort zone, ultimately enhancing their language proficiency. The last, it is recommended that teaching methods might be adapted to individual differences in personality. Because students ought to have equal opportunities to get involved in their learning process whether extroverted or introverted.
Conclusion
In many ways, human beings as learners are different from one another. According to the finding of numerous studies, it is important to identify students’ personality traits and make them aware of these differences. Students have different personalities in language learning, some students tend to be extrovert and the others and introvert. It can have an impact on students’ ability in mastering English. This study investigated the impact of extroversion and introversion on using socio-affective strategies. To meet this end, the researcher selected 28 EFL Iranian students at the university level at Islamic Azad University, Tabriz Branch. To gather the required data, the participants filled up two questionnaires of personality and socio-affective strategy use.
The results revealed that the mean scores of the introverts were higher than the extroverts in using socio-affective strategy. Also, this study revealed that there was a significant difference between introverts and extroverts in using socio-affective strategy in writing skill.
Teachers might benefit greatly from the findings of this study. They should try to get the most out of it. In order to recognize and identify the differences between extroverts and introverts, the teachers should provide ways that encourage introverted students to participate in class and communicate. Teachers might be aware of their students’ various personalities in order to provide them with the best learning environments they need. Teachers could divide the class into two groups of introverts and extroverts and try to meet their needs by using various teaching approaches and strategies that are appropriate for the students.
In addition, Ellis (2003) stated that the personality of students constitutes a major factor contributing to success or failure in language learning. Since introverts could not participate in class discussions as much as extroverts. Syllabus designers can create writing activities which help introverted students to give their opinions or participate in class discussions.
This study has several limitations that might have influenced the results. These limitations can be eliminated in further studies. Firstly, this study might not be generalized since the sample size was limited and it was conducted at Islamic Azad University, Tabriz Branch. Secondly, this study investigated the use of socio-affective strategies by introverts and extroverts. Secondly, the present study used questionnaires as the only criterion measure of the students’ personalities and using socio-affective strategies. In future studies, researchers can investigate the use of meta-cognitive and cognitive strategies by introverts and extroverts. Finally, future studies can investigate the range of appropriate feedback types for introverts and extroverts regarding the use of socio-affective strategies in developing four language skills.
Meanwhile, the present study had the following delimitation. Firstly, the participants were chosen from EFL university students at Islamic Azad University, Tabriz Branch, while the study could have led to different results if the participants were children. Secondly, the Questionnaire that was used for measuring personalities; this article primarily focuses on the dichotomy of introversion and extroversion, thereby neglecting the ambivert personality.
Furthermore, there are several other aspects of personality characteristics and language learning strategies that may be interesting for those who want to study in these fields of research. Extroversion/introversion and socio-affective strategy among EFL students were the objects of this research. Other research will investigate different aspects of language learning strategy such as meta-cognitive and cognitive. Furthermore, researchers may be interested in components of personality such as agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness. Moreover, this study can be repeated with larger samples, enabling researchers to investigate the possible similarities in more detail. Finally, the participants of this study were selected at the university level; hence, it is proposed that the same study be replicated with different levels of proficiency at schools or language institutes.
References
Anaraki, S. S., Zareian, G., &Khodaee, M. (2015, April). Socio-affective strategy use among Iranian tertiary level students. Paper presented at the First Conference in Challenges in Foreign Language Teaching in Iran (CFLTI 2015), Sabzevar, Iran.
Babai, H., Sadeghi, K. (2009). Characteristics of an effective English language teachers as perceived by Iranian teachers and learners of English. English language teaching, 24, 130-143.
Cain, S. (2011). The power of introverts. Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/quiet-the-power-introverts/201103/quiz-are-you-introvert-or-extrovert-and-why-it-matters.
Chastain, K. (1975). Affective and ability factors in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 25, 153-161.
Cummins, J. (2008). BICS and CALP: Empirical and theoretical status of the distinction. Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2(2), 71–83.
Dorney, Z. (2005). The Psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds), The Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp. 525-551). Oxford: Blackwell.
Ellis, R. (2008). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gazzaniga, M. S., & Heatherton, T. F. (2002). Psychological science: Mind, brain, and behavior. New York City: W.W. Norton & Co.
Griffiths, C. (2010). Strategies of successful language learners. Journal of English Language Studies, 1 (3), 1-18. http://www.sid.ir/en/VEWSSID/J_pdf/1032120100301.pdf
Jung, C. G. (1921/1971). PsychologischeTypen. Zürich: Rascher.
Kayaoglu, M.N. (2013). Impact of extroversion and introversion on language learning behaviors. Social Behavior and Personality, 41(5), 819-826. http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.5.819
Lahey, J. (2013). Introverted kids need to learn to speak up at school. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/02/introverted-kids-need-to-learn-to-speak-up-at-school/272960/.
Laney, M. O. (2002). The introvert advantage: How to thrive in an extrovert world. New York:Workman Publishing.
Lestari, A., Sada, C., &Suhartono, L. (2013). Analysis on the relationship of extrovert -introvert personality and students' speaking performance. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan PembelajaranUntan, 4(3).
MacIntyre, P. D., Babin, P. A., & Clément, R. (1999). Willingness to communicate: Antecedents and consequences. Communication Quarterly, 47, 215-229.
Marashi, H., &Naddim, R. (2019). Using information gap and opinion gap tasks to improve introvert and extrovert learners’ speaking. Applied Research on English Language, 8(2), 187-206. Doi: 10.22108/are.2019.113273.1371.
McCrae, R. R., &Costa, P. T. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, 2, 139-153.
Nussbaum, E. M. (2002). How introverts versus extroverts approach small-group argumentative discussions. The Elementary School Journal, 102(3), 183-197. doi:10.1086/499699.
O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A.U., & Walker, C. (1987). Some applications of cognitive theory to second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston: Heinle&Heinle.
Pritchard, D. F. L. (1952). An investigation into the relationship between personality traits and ability in modern languages. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 22(2), 147-148. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1952.tb02817.x.
Qanwal, S., & Ghani, M. (2019). Relationship Between Introversion/Extroversion Personality Trait and Proficiency in ESL Writing Skills. International Journal of English Linguistics, 9(4), 107. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v9n4p107
Rossier, R. (1976). Extroversion-introversion as a significant variable in the learning of oral English as a second language. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Southern California, United States.
Sanjaya, D., & Mokhtar, A. A. S. (2015). Relationship between Introversion/Extroversion Personality Trait and Proficiency in ESL Writing Skill. Asian EFL Journal Professional Teaching Articles, (87), 4–16.
Scimonelli, P. (2002). Language learning strategies: Helping the students find ''il metodo''. Institute for language education: Main assignment, Norwich. Retrieved from http://web.tiscalinet.it/colabianchi/NorwichSITE/BRUNA%20main%20assign.-%20LLS.doc.
Silverman, L. (2012). Introversion and giftedness. Denver, Colorado: Gifted Development Center in Denver, Colorado.
Stern, H. H., (1992). Issues and options in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Appendix A
Personality
Answer in terms of how well the statement describes you. Do not answer how you think you should be, or what other people do. There are no right or wrong answers to these statements.
1. I prefer one-on-one conversations to group activities.
2. I often prefer to express myself in writing.
3. I enjoy solitude.
4. I seem to care about wealth, fame, and status less than my peers.
5. I dislike small talk, but I enjoy talking in-depth about topics that matter to me.
6. People tell me that I’m a good listener.
7. I’m not a big risk-taker.
8. I enjoy work that allows me to “dive in” with few interruptions.
9. I like to celebrate birthdays on a small scale, with only one or two close friends or family members.
10. People describe me as “soft-spoken” or “mellow.”
11. I prefer not to show or discuss my work with others until it’s finished.
12. I dislike conflict.
13. I do my best work on my own.
14. I tend to think before I speak.
15. I feel drained after being out and about, even if I’ve enjoyed myself.
16. I often let calls go through to voice-mail.
17. If I had to choose, I’d prefer a weekend with absolutely nothing to do to one with too many things scheduled.
18. I don’t enjoy multi-tasking.
19. I can concentrate easily.
20. In classroom situations, I prefer lectures to seminars.
Appendix B
Socio-Affective Strategy Questionnaire (SASQ)
This questionnaire is prepared in order to find more about socio-affective strategies which help finding better and easier ways to learning English. Your contribution helps us more to achieve this objective. Please read each section carefully and provide the answers by filling in the bubble of the response (1. Never or almost never true of me. 2. Usually not true of me 3.Somewhat true of me. 4. Usually true of me 5. Always or almost always true of me) that tells HOW TRUE THE STATEMENT IS.
Part A
1. When I speak English, I ask English speakers or my classmates to correct me. | ☐1☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 | ||
2. I practice Speaking English with other students. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 | ||
3. If I have to give a talk to the class, I present it to a friend first so he or she can tell me how it sounds. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 | ||
4. When I do not remember a word or a phrase in English, I ask my classmates for help. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 | ||
5. I search for individuals and groups to whom I can talk in English. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 | ||
6. I try to relax whenever I feel afraid of using English. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 | ||
7. I volunteer for speaking English in the class, even if I’m afraid of making a mistake. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 | ||
8. I give myself a reward or treat when I actively participate in a discussion. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 | ||
9. I notice if I am tense or nervous when I speak in English, and try to avoid it later on. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 | ||
10., I write down my feelings about learning speaking skillin a language learning dairy.
| ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
Part B
11. When I don’t understand what the teacher says, I seek help from a classmate. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
12. While listening to English news, programs, or music, I ask a classmate for my listening deficiencies. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
13. I practice listening skills with other students. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
14. To improve my listening skills I ask my professor for advice. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
15. I share my feelings with others while learning listening skills. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
16. I try to avoid being tense or nervous through focusing when I'm listening to English materials. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
17. I push myself to follow English media (movies, music, news, etc.) even if I‘m afraid of having difficulties understanding them. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
18. I reward myself after finishing a listening task (like transcribing and audio file). | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
19. When exposed to English media (movies, news, TV shows, etc.), I notice if I’m nervous and try to avoid it.
| ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
Part C
20. While reading an English text, I ask professors or a student to help me understanding it. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
21. I practice new words and sentences I learned though reading, with other students. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
22. I ask others to help me finding main idea of the text. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
23. I try to learn about the culture of English speakers via reading different materials. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
24. I try reading extra materials like newspapers, magazines, or websites to improve my reading skill. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
25. If I don’t understand a text, I reread it slower. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
26. I write down my feelings about learning reading skill in a language learning dairy. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
27. I try to neglect my stress and anxiety resulted from complexity of the text. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
28. I plunge myself into reading, even if I'm nervous to do it. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
29. I know how I feel when I read an English text. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
Part D
30. I share my writings with my classmates. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
31. I talk to someone else about how I feel when I am learning and practicing writing skill. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
32. I send messages, emails and reports to my professors and classmates in English. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
33. I participate in writing panels to practice English writing with other students. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
34. I seek advice from my professors for writing skills. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
35. I try to avoid stress when I’m writing in English. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
36. I try to enjoy writing in English. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
37. I give myself a reward or a treat when I successfully accomplish a writing task. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
38. I notice my tense and anxiety while writing in English and try to avoid it later on. | ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4 ☐5 |
Biodata
Hamed Ghorbani is currently working as an EFL teacher and researcher at Azad University in Tabriz, holding a PhD in EFL. His research interests include English as a Foreign Language teaching and learning as well as curriculum and instruction.
مقایسه زبان آموزان برونگرا/درونگرای زبان انگلیسی از نظر استفاده از راهبردهای عاطفی اجتماعی در توسعه چهار مهارت زبانی صحبت کردن، شنیدن، خواندن و نوشتن
شخصیت زبان آموزان یکی از عوامل ضروری برای کسب زبان دوم است. استراتژی عاطفی اجتماعی به یادگیرندگان کمک می کند تا احساسات و انگیزه ها را تنظیم کنند. این مطالعه به بررسی تأثیر برونگرایی و درونگرایی بر استفاده از راهبردهای عاطفی اجتماعی میپردازد. شرکت کنندگان در این پژوهش 26 نفر از دانشجویان ایرانی زبان انگلیسی در سطح دانشگاهی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تبریز بودند. دانشجویانی که مایل به شرکت بودند از کلاس های BA/MA/PhD انتخاب شدند. در این مطالعه توصیفی کمی از دو پرسشنامه استفاده شده است. ابتدا، محقق پرسشنامه شخصیتی را که توسط کین (2011) تهیه شده بود، اجرا کرد تا دانش آموزان را به دو گروه درونگرا و برونگرا دسته بندی کند. سپس پرسشنامه عاطفی اجتماعی توسط دانشجویان پاسخ داده شد. نتایج تحلیلهای آماری نشان داد که بین درونگراها و برونگراها در استفاده از راهبردهای عاطفی اجتماعی تفاوت معناداری وجود دارد و میانگین نمره درونگراها بیشتر از برونگراها است. همچنین، نتایج این پژوهش نشان داد که بین افراد درونگرا و برونگرا در استفاده از استراتژی عاطفی اجتماعی در مهارت نوشتاری تفاوت معناداری وجود دارد. یافته های این مطالعه مفاهیمی را در رابطه با استفاده از راهبردهای عاطفی اجتماعی در افراد درونگرا و برونگرا پیشنهاد می کند.
کلمات کلیدی: شخصیت، برونگرا، درونگرا، استراتژی، اجتماعی عاطفی
