Inicio
todoELE
  • Inicio
  • Materiales
    • πŸ“‹ Actividades
    • πŸ“ Conjugación
    • πŸ“Š Corpus
    • πŸ“” Diccionarios
    • βœ… Evaluación
    • βš™οΈ Gramática
    • πŸ“— Manuales
    • ✍️ Ortografía
    • πŸ“… Programación
    • πŸ—£οΈ Pronunciación
    • πŸ“ Recursos
    • πŸ”€ Vocabulario
    • πŸ’» Herramientas digitales
  • Formación
    • πŸ“š Bibliografía
    • πŸ‘₯ Congresos
    • πŸŽ“ Cursos
    • 🏫 Centros
    • 🏒 Organizaciones
    • πŸ“° Revistas
    • 🌍 Atlas de ELE
  • Trabajo
    • πŸ’Ό Ofertas de trabajo
    • ℹ️ Trabajo - Recursos
  • En la red
    • 🌐 Sitios ELE
    • πŸ“° Agregador
    • πŸ“§ Formespa
  • IA
    • ✨ Nuevos contenidos
    • πŸ“š Bibliografía IA
    • 🧰 Herramientas IA
    • πŸ’¬ Prompts
    • πŸ§ͺ Experiencias IA
    • 🌐 Sitios web IA
    • πŸ“° Actualidad IA
  • Comunidad
    • πŸ“° Actualidad ELE
    • 😊 Anécdotas ELE
    • πŸ“ Blog
    • πŸ“ŒTablón de anuncios
  • Buscar

Ruta de navegación

  • Inicio
  • Bibliografia
  • The effects of reference of comparison (self-referential vs. normative) and regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention) feedback on EFL learners’ willingness to communicate

The effects of reference of comparison (self-referential vs. normative) and regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention) feedback on EFL learners’ willingness to communicate

Nourollah Zarrinabadi
Elham Saberi Dehkordi
2024
Language Teaching Research
28-2
556-576
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.117…
artículo
estudio experimental
entrevistas
estudio empírico
feedback/retroalimentación
factores afectivos
expresión oral
motivación
enseñanza/aprendizaje de lenguas

This article reports on a mixed methods study that examined the effect of reference of comparison (self-referential vs. normative) and regulatory focus (promotion-focused vs. prevention-focused) on willingness to communicate (WTC) among learners of English as a foreign language (EFL). One hundred female English learners were randomly assigned to the self-referential, normative, prevention, promotion, and control feedback groups. They received different types of feedback for 15 sessions. The students were tested for their WTC, anxiety and communication competence before and after the intervention. The results of MANOVA and paired samples comparisons indicated that self-referential, normative, and promotion feedback positively improved WTC and communication competence and decreased anxiety. However, prevention feedback decreased WTC and communication competence and increased anxiety. Follow-up interview data indicated that feedback influenced WTC by providing learning checks or affecting learners’ self-confidence, reducing anxiety, fostering motivation, and decreasing peer pressure. Finally, it was suggested that teachers should mainly present feedback to emphasize task accomplishments and growth and to inform the students about their progress over time.

  • Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios

Enviar publicación

Contenidos relacionados

  • Why only feedback? Including feed up and feed forward improves non-linguistic aspects of L2 writing
  • The interplay of oral corrective feedback and L2 willingness to communicate across proficiency levels
  • Investigating the effects of reverse dubbing tasks on English speaking proficiency and English learning motivation
  • The role of changes in pronunciation ability and anxiety through Gen-AI on EFL learners’ self-directed speaking motivation and social interaction confidence - A CHAT perspective
  • Oral corrective feedback: Iranian in-service EFL teachers’ cognitions and reported practices
  • Understanding Speaking Demotivation in Iranian EFL Contexts: A Self-Determination Theory Analysis of Learner and Teacher Perspectives
Sobre Todoele Índice Publica Contacto: todoele@gmail.com
Política de privacidad Créditos