Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching Department of English Studies, Faculty of Pedagogy and Fine Arts, Adam Mickiewicz University, Kalisz SSLLT 1 (4). 467-489 http://www.ssllt.amu.edu.pl Personality factors as predictors 1 of foreign language aptitude Adriana Biedro(cid:375) Pomeranian Academy in S(cid:371)upsk [email protected] Abstract The study addresses a problem which is inadequately investigated in second language acquisition research, that is, personality predictors of foreign language aptitude. Specifically, it focuses on the Five Factor model which includes Open- ness to Experience, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neurot- icism (Costa & McCrae, 1992) as traits differentiating gifted and nongifted for- eign language learners and predicting results of foreign language aptitude tests. Although contemporary researchers generally agree that affect is an important variable in second language acquisition, most empirical studies demonstrate that personality factors are weakly correlated with cognitive abilities and that their contribution to the ultimate attainment is minor (cf. Robinson & Ellis, 2008). On the other hand, these factors constitute an integral part of cognitive ability development (cf. Dörnyei, 2009); therefore, neglecting them in research on foreign language aptitude would be unjustified. The following study is an at- tempt to analyze the Five Factors in two groups of learners: gifted and nongifted. In order to answer the question as to which and to what extent per- sonality factors have a predictive effect on foreign language aptitude, the results were subjected to a multiple regression analysis. The findings of the study are presented and discussed in a wider context of research on cognitive abilities. Keywords: the Five Factors, personality, foreign language aptitude, gifted for- eign language learners 1 Preparation of this research project was supported by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education in 2009-2011. Project no. 1231/B/HO3/2009/37 467 Adriana Biedro(cid:375) For several decades the issue of personality effects on second language acquisition (SLA) has been high on the agenda of many second language acquisi- tion researchers. Its major focus has been on selected personality characteris- tics, for example anxiety (cf. Dewaele, Petrides, & Furnham, 2008; Piechurska- Kuciel, 2008) or motivation, which is considered a cognitive rather than affective factor in contemporary motivation theories (Dörnyei, 2001, 2010), whereas other factors have received very little attention or have been completely omit- ted (cf. Pawlak, 2009, p. 8). In particular, personality traits have been consistent- ly neglected in many research studies as well as literature reviews, also those which focused specifically on individual differences and affect in SLA (cf. Arnold, 1999; Griffiths, 2008). The most popular instrument to measure personality used in SLA studies has been the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 1998), which categorizes personality according to four dichotomous scales (cf. Ehrman, 1996, 2008). However, recently, other personality scales adopted from the field of psychology have become increas- ingly popular. One of the paradigms gaining interest in individual difference research in SLA is Costa and McCrae’s (1992) Five Factor model of personality (FFM; also referred to as the Big Five). The Five Factors include: Openness to Experience, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism and comprise the most comprehensive empirical model of personality. As Dörnyei (2005) has it: “At present the Big Five is gaining momentum to the ex- tent that it seems almost ubiquitous in the current literature” (pp. 12-13). Costa and McCrae’s model as well as their famous Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992) have been applied in a few studies on multi- lingualism (cf. Deweale, 2002, 2009; Dewaele & Furnham, 2000) and gifted for- eign language learners (cf. Hu & Reiterer, 2009). Nevertheless, there is very little research on the relationship between foreign language aptitude and personality traits, possibly due to the disappointing correlations between success in a for- eign language and personality dimensions (cf. Dörnyei, 2005, 2009) and, conse- quently, their lower status in research on predictors of learning outcomes. As Ellis and Robinson (2008) argue: “Learners’ aptitude, attitude and motivation are all systematically related to rate of progress and ultimate attainment, but affective factors are subordinate to more powerful cognitive developmental and maturational factors” (p. 7). On the other hand, some researchers being aware of the potential of personality factors in the development of foreign language aptitude call for research in this neglected field (cf. Bongaerts, Planken, & Schils, 1995; Dörnyei, 2009, 2010; Hu & Reiterer, 2009; Hyltenstam & Abrahamsson, 2003; Moyer, 1999, 2007). The following study was designed to measure the predictive effect of the Five Factors on foreign language aptitude in two groups of learners: gifted 468 Personality factors as predictors of foreign language aptitude and nongifted. The first sections of the article present the theoretical back- ground of the FFM, a brief overview of foreign language aptitude models and the theoretical and empirical perspective on the role of personality traits in foreign language aptitude. Then, the study is presented and discussed in the context of research on foreign language aptitude. The analyses applied in the study included descriptive statistics, the Pearson product-moment correlation, t test of differences and regression analysis. The article closes with some con- cluding remarks and suggestions for further research. The Five Factors Personality factors are relatively stable styles of thinking, feeling and act- ing. Personality research has gained much popularity in the past decades thanks to the recognition that personality predicts a large part of behavior and variety of social and academic outcomes (Bouchard & McGue, 2002). Cross-cultural studies of personality have provided cumulative evidence that personality fac- tors are universal and replicable, which means that they can be found in all soci- eties and cultures of the world (McCrae & Costa, 1997). Because no significant differences in traits and trait structures were found in various cultures, a conclu- sion was drawn that traits are not generated by the specificity of a culture but are general and attributed to biological bases and psychological consequences of the shared human experience of living in society. There has been much controversy on how many factors create personality: three (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1964; Tellegen, 1982), five (Costa & McCrae, 1992), eight (Comrey, 1970), or 16 (Cattell, Eber, & Tatsuoka, 1970). The number of higher-order traits and their hierarchical structure is also disputable. Eysenck’s traditional three- factor theory, which became a point of reference for many researchers, includes Neuroticism, Psychoticism and Extraversion. The factor of Psychoticism connected with aggressiveness and hostility is the most controversial one. Tellegen’s three- factor model replaced Extraversion with Positive Emotionality (the tendency to be positively and actively engaged with one’s environment), Neuroticism with Negative Emotionality (the tendency to experience negative emotions) and introduced the factor of Constraint (the ability to inhibit impulses). Nowadays, most psychologists agree that the best representation of human personality is provided by the FFM (Costa & McCrae, 1992). According to this model, there are five basic dimensions of personality: Openness to Experience or Intellect, Conscientiousness or Will to Achieve, Extraversion or Surgency, Agreeableness versus Antagonism and Neuroti- cism versus Emotional Stability. Each of these five factors represents the common variance among a set of more specific traits. In 1992 Costa and McCrae designed a tool for measuring personality, the NEO-PI-R, which operationalized the FFM by 469 Adriana Biedro(cid:375) assessing 30 specific traits (six for each factor). Factor analyses conducted on differ- ent groups have consistently generated a five-factor structure of personality irre- spective of gender, ethnic group, age or culture. Behavioral genetic findings (Bouchard & McGue, 2002) provided convincing evidence that the Five Factors are moderately to substantially heritable. In their review of literature, Bouchard and McGue (2002) suggested that genetic influence on personality trait variation ranges from 40 to 55%. Moreover, there is a strong case for the hypothesis that shared family environment exerts basically no influence on personality traits. Estimates of genetic and environmental influences on person- ality are based on animal studies (Gosling, 2001), and on twin, adoption and family studies (Bouchard, 1997; Bouchard & Loehlin, 2001). Interestingly, no gender dif- ferences in heritability of the Five Factors were found in studies on big populations (N = 30 000; Eaves et al., 1999). According to Bouchard and McGue (2002), analyses of twin, adoption and family studies provide strong and consistent evidence for both genetic and environmental contributions to personality; however, the latter are far more difficult to detect and measure. All these studies were consistent in indicating that the environmental sources of influence have effects in personality differences (nonshared) rather than in personality similarities (shared) between children raised in the same family. These nonshared factors, that is, factors which differentiate relatives, are very complex and difficult to identify. Longitudinal studies over the period of six years confirmed that the Five Factors are relatively stable. What is more, they perform an important role in adaptation to the environment. Openness is a predictor of career choice, Con- scientiousness is the best predictor of the quality of professional activity as well as academic achievement, and all of the factors except for Openness are connected with life satisfaction (Strelau, 2000, p. 555). Each of the Five Factors constitutes a continuum with two extremes: (cid:120) Openness to Experience denotes an appreciation for art, emotion, ad- venture, unusual ideas, imagination, curiosity and variety of experience. People characterized by high levels of Openness to Experience are intel- lectually curious, sensitive to beauty, creative and aware of their feel- ings. They tend to be unconventional, independent in their judgment and willing to question authority and discover new political, social and aesthetic ideas. People gaining low scores on Openness tend to be more conventional and conservative and have traditional interests. They ap- preciate traditional values, have pragmatic interests and prefer socially accepted ways of acting. The six specific traits of Openness to Experi- ence include: Fantasy, Aesthetics, Feelings, Actions, Ideas and Values. (cid:120) Conscientiousness is a tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully and aim for achievement. This factor affects our control and regulation of im- 470 Personality factors as predictors of foreign language aptitude pulses. High scorers exhibit a strong will, are motivated and persistent in their endeavors. They are thorough, dutiful, punctual, thoughtful and reli- able at work. They display a preference for planned rather than sponta- neous behavior. They can have high academic and professional achieve- ments. A high degree of Conscientiousness can indicate perfectionism and workaholism. Low scorers are rather sloppy at work and display low achievement motivation as well as hedonistic attitude towards life, lack of clear life goals, laziness, impulsivity and spontaneity in making decisions. The six specific traits of Conscientiousness include: Competence, Self- Discipline, Achievement-Striving, Dutifulness, Order and Deliberation. (cid:120) Extraversion is connected with positive emotions, surgency and the ten- dency to seek out stimulation and the company of others. This trait mani- fests itself by evident engagement with the external world. People scoring high on this trait are friendly and warmhearted, full of energy, prone to play and search for stimulation. Extraverts enjoy being with people and tend to dominate in social situations. They are active, enthusiastic, vigorous, opti- mistic and talkative. Introverts are less socially active than extraverts. They treat others with reserve, are less optimistic and tend to stay lonely and withdrawn. Introverts seem quiet, modest and thoughtful. Their lack of so- cial involvement should not be interpreted as shyness or depression; they simply need less stimulation than extraverts. The six specific traits of Extra- version include: Warmth, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Activity, Excite- ment-Seeking, and Positive Emotions. (cid:120) Agreeableness reflects individual differences in general concern for social harmony. It denotes the tendency to be compassionate and cooperative ra- ther than suspicious and antagonistic towards others. Agreeable individuals are friendly and helpful and generally assume that other people represent similar virtues. They optimistically believe that people are honest, decent and trustworthy. They appreciate good relationships with other people. They can be described as straightforward, ingenuous, sincere, considerate, generous, altruistic, helpful and willing to compromise their interests with others. People who score low on Agreeableness are egocentric, skeptical about others’ motives, competitive rather than cooperative, suspicious, ag- gressive and hard-faced. They are not interested in others’ well-being. The six specific traits of Agreeableness include: Trust, Modesty, Compliance, Al- truism, Straightforwardness and Tender-Mindedness. (cid:120) Neuroticism (emotional instability) is the tendency to experience negative emotions, for example anger, anxiety or depression. High scorers are sus- ceptible to irrational ideas, less able to control their impulses and manage stress. They react to stress with fear, tension, tend to worry themselves sick 471 Adriana Biedro(cid:375) and interpret ordinary situations as threatening. They often experience hos- tility and anger, get discouraged and depressed in difficult situations. Their self-esteem is low and they can be embarrassed in social situations. Their negative emotional reactions tend to continue for long periods of time, which means they are often in a bad mood. Low scorers are more emotion- ally stable, quiet, relaxed, less easily upset and less emotionally reactive. They manage stress more effectively and do not experience frustration and irritation as often as neurotics. The six specific traits of Neuroticism include: Anxiety, Hostility, Depression, Self-Consciousness, Impulsiveness and Vul- nerability (Costa & McCrae, 1992; McCrae & Costa, 2003; Nosal, 1999). Ac- cording to Watson and Clark (1994), the trait Negative Affect is a defining feature of Neuroticism. Individuals who are high in Neuroticism experience an array of such negative states as episodes of anxiety, depression and hos- tility. Negative affectivity is also associated with introspection and rumina- tion, negativistic cognitive style and a focus on negative aspects of a person and life in general. Consequently, it is characterized by a low self-concept and a high level of stress, accompanied by poor coping potential. In con- trast, individuals with a low Neuroticism trait tend to be content, secure and self-assured. Negative Affect correlates positively with Introversion, whereas Positive Affect with Extraversion. Foreign Language Aptitude The contemporary concept of foreign language aptitude is based on the definition proposed by Carroll (1981), who termed it as “the individual's initial state of readiness and capacity for learning a foreign language, and probable degree of facility in doing so . . .” (p. 85). In terms of structure, Carroll de- scribed foreign language aptitude as consisting of four relatively independent subcomponents: phonetic coding ability, grammatical sensitivity, inductive language learning ability, and associative memory (Carroll, 1981, p. 105). Car- roll’s theory as well as his famous Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT; Carroll & Sapon, 2002) have become the most often referred to paradigm in all subsequent studies on foreign language aptitude (cf. Dörnyei, 2005). The most influential contemporary models of foreign language aptitude are Skehan’s processing stage model (2002) and Robinson’s aptitude complex model (2002), which include psycholinguistic and cognitive-science research findings on human cognitive abilities. Skehan’s model refers stages of SLA to foreign language aptitude components, whereas Robinson’s model relates cognitive profiles of foreign language learners to different types of instruction demanding different levels of awareness. Both models involve the factor of 472 Personality factors as predictors of foreign language aptitude working memory, which reconceptualizes the original, that is, Carroll’s model. In the light of contemporary research, foreign language aptitude is viewed not as a monolith, but as a conglomerate of a number of cognitive variables (cf. Dörnyei & Skehan, 2003). The only foreign language aptitude theory that takes into account personality and motivational (conative) characteristics is Snow’s (1987) cognitive-affective-conative triad of foreign language aptitude, further extended by Corno et al. (2002). In this model, aptitude is not limited to abilities but includes aspects of personality such as achievement motivation, freedom from anxiety, positive self-concept and control of impulses, temperament and moods. This paradigm also involves the Five Factors. Other classic foreign language aptitude theories (cf. Carroll, 1993; Robinson, 2002; Skehan, 2002) include only purely cognitive factors, which, consequently, affected empirical research on foreign language aptitude. The Five Factors in Foreign Language Aptitude Research Despite many controversies surrounding the role of noncognitive factors in foreign language learning outcomes, contemporary SLA researchers generally agree that cognitive and affective factors are related in the field of language learn- ing (cf. Dewaele et al., 2008; Dörnyei, 2010; Griffiths, 2008; Hu & Reiterer, 2009; Laever, Ehrman, & Shekhtman, 2005). Success in learning a foreign language is associated with personality variables (cf. Dörnyei, 2005; Ehrman, 2008; Ehrman & Oxford, 1995). Nevertheless, personality factors are on the sidelines of research on foreign language aptitude and despite the declared need for such analysis, the researchers usually resign from it in their studies (cf. Abrahamsson & Hyltenstam, 2008; Bongaerts, van Summeren, Planken, & Schils, 1997; Ioup, Boustagui, El Tigi, & Moselle, 1994; Morgan, Smith, Tsimpli, & Woll, 2007; Moyer, 1999, 2007; Obler, 1989; Sawyer & Ranta, 2001; Schneiderman & Desmarais, 1988; Skehan, 1998; van Boxtel, Bongaerts, & Coppen, 2003). Consequently, instruments de- signed to measure this construct usually include only cognitive tests. An innovative foreign language aptitude test under development by Doughty et al. (2010), the High-Level Language Aptitude Battery (Hi-Lab), designed with a view to predicting high-level attainment in post-critical SLA, included three tolerance-of-ambiguity measures. Eventually, after factor and reliability analyses, the authors decided to eliminate all three measures from the battery until a reliable behavioral measure is developed. What is more, the researchers declared that they decided to limit their tool to purely cognitive factors (p. 28). This decision accords with the often voiced opinion that the 473 Adriana Biedro(cid:375) role of personality factors in foreign language aptitude is far from straightforward (cf. Corno et al., 2002; Dörnyei, 2005). A few studies devoted some attention to personality factors in foreign language aptitude. Bongaerts et al. (1995), Bongaerts et al. (1997), Bongaerts, Mennen, and van der Silk (2000), and Moyer (1999, 2007), in reports of their studies on highly motivated and advanced foreign language learners, suggest- ed that some specific personality factors might, in connection with exceptional aptitude, affect exceptional success. The researchers emphasized the need for research on not only cognitive, but also affective factors in exceptional foreign language learners, which are capable of compensating for the late start (cf. Hu & Reiterer, 2009; Hyltenstam & Abrahamsson, 2003). Personality traits have been measured in studies on multilingual foreign language learners. A study that fits in with this line of research was conducted by Ramirez-Esparza, Gosling, Benet-Martínez, Potter, and Pennebaker (2006) on 79 Spanish-English bilinguals. The researchers found that the bilinguals displayed slightly different personality profiles while speaking different lan- guages. They were more extraverted, agreeable and conscientious in English than in Spanish, whereas their Neuroticism and Openness remained un- changed. O(cid:463)(cid:258)(cid:375)ska-Ponikwia’s study (as cited in Dewaele, 2011) on 137 Polish- English bilinguals revealed that Agreeableness, Conscientiousness and Open- ness are positively correlated with “feeling different” in an L2. Dewaele and Furnham (2000) found that Extraversion correlates posi- tively with oral fluency measures in an L2, especially in stressful situations. Moreover, extraverts, due to their risk-taking ability, are more willing to use colloquial and emotion words than introverts. Dewaele (2002) discovered that Extraversion and Neuroticism predicted levels of foreign language anxiety in English L3 production, explaining 20% of the total variance. High levels of Ex- traversion and low levels of Neuroticism were linked to lower levels of anxiety in English. The same author (2009) presented evidence that psychological studies have consistently shown extraverts’ superiority over introverts at short-term and working memory. Finally, Dewaele found negative, but statisti- cally insignificant, correlations between Extraversion and foreign language course marks (2009). Young (as cited in Dewaele, 2009) discovered that Open- Mindedness (a concept similar to Openness to Experience) is a good predictor of foreign language learning outcomes. Openness to Experience is the factor the most strongly related to intellec- tual functioning. Its correlation with verbal intelligence was estimated by McCrae (as cited in Nosal, 1999, p. 256) at .30. Openness is a relatively stable factor that is believed to have a strong genetic component; the influence of genetic factors on Openness is estimated at .61 (Nosal, 1999). It also correlates with creativity and 474 Personality factors as predictors of foreign language aptitude divergent thinking, which are factors characterizing gifted individuals (McCrae, 1987). Summing up, this factor is the strongest potential predictor of success in foreign language learning (cf. Dörnyei, 2005). The question whether it can also be a predictor of foreign language aptitude is yet to be answered. An ongoing study on phonetically talented L2 learners conducted by Hu and Reiterer (2009) has provided interesting insights into the correlation be- tween phonetic abilities and personality factors. The researchers found no correlation between pronunciation talent and Extraversion, Openness to Expe- rience or Neuroticism, whilst a moderate positive correlation was found for Conscientiousness and Agreeableness. They attributed this observation to the separateness of phonetic aptitude, which does not require social capability, from other aptitudes affecting oral language (Hu & Reiterer, 2009). Finally, Biedro(cid:375) (2010) investigated differences in personality factors be- tween two groups of learners: 44 gifted L2 learners (highly proficient multilin- guals) and 37 nongifted L2 learners (year-one English philology students). Only one of the Five Factors, namely Openness to Experience, was found to be sig- nificantly higher in the gifted L2 learners than in the nongifted L2 learners. The other factors did not reveal statistically significant differences between the samples. The same author (Biedro(cid:375), 2012) reported on a study conducted on gifted L2 learners (n = 44) in which personality factors were correlated with cognitive factors (foreign language aptitude tests results). The results showed that personality and cognitive factors were not correlated, which means that in this sample of learners there was no relationship between these factors. To sum up, there is no direct evidence that Openness is a predictor of success in learning a foreign language or foreign language aptitude tests but the results of empirical studies suggest such a correlation. Method The aim of the study presented in this article was to examine the level of the Five Factors in two groups of learners: gifted and nongifted, and to test whether personality traits are predictors of foreign language aptitude as measured by two foreign language aptitude tests. Two hypotheses proposed for the purpose of this study are the following: H1. There will be significant differences between the gifted and the nongifted learners in the Five Factors. The gifted L2 learners will score higher on Openness and Conscientiousness than the nongifted learners. H2. Personality factors will explain some variance in foreign language apti- tude. Openness and Conscientiousness will have a positive effect on 475 Adriana Biedro(cid:375) foreign language aptitude, whereas Neuroticism will have a negative effect on foreign language aptitude. As has already been stated, the relationship between foreign language apti- tude and personality traits is poorly investigated; therefore, great caution must be exercised when interpreting the results. Participants There were two groups of participants: gifted (n = 44) and nongifted (n = 46). The first group included 44 (31 female and 13 male) accomplished multi- linguals (termed as gifted L2 learners). Participants from this group were iden- tified as gifted based on proficiency scores, the number of languages they had learned, language learning history, recommendation of their teachers, the MLAT (Carroll and Sapon, 2002) score and the Language Ability Test (Pol. Test Zdolno(cid:401)ci J(cid:295)zykowych [TZJ]; Wojtowicz, 2006) score. They were appointed by their teachers or encouraged by coworkers or class-mates to participate; some responded to an invitation to participate in the study sent via e-mail. All of the participants were native speakers of Polish. They were mainly philology students from Polish universities, but there were also teachers in for- eign language departments at university, school teachers of English and a few other professionals; six were doctoral students. In line with the previous re- search results (cf. Abrahamsson & Hyltenstam, 2008; Bongaerts, 1999; DeKeyser, 2000), most of the participants of the study were students of lan- guages or professional linguists, which, according to DeKeyser (2000, p. 507), implies high verbal aptitude. Their age varied from 20 to 35 years; the mean was 24.5. All the participants were experienced language learners. The level of profi- ciency of the sample in at least one foreign language was advanced (C1/C2). All the participants were highly advanced in English. Fourteen (32%) were highly advanced in one foreign language, 19 (43%) in two languages, eight (18%) in three, two (4%) in four, and one (2%) in five languages. If they spoke more than two foreign languages, their level of proficiency in the additional languages was usually elementary/intermediate (A2/B1+). The number of languages they were learning varied from one to 11 (four and a half average) and included European and non-European languages. All the achievements were formally confirmed by official documents: certificates acknowledged in Poland and diplomas from uni- versities in the case of advanced levels of a language. If an elemen- tary/intermediate level was declared, end-of-course grades were accepted as a proof of the level of advancement. Only participants whose general MLAT score placed them within at least the 95th percentile and who scored at least 80% in the TZJ were accepted for the research. 476