Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Willingness to Communicate: A Predictor of Pushing Vocabulary Knowledge from Receptive to Productive

  • Published:
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The issue of moving vocabulary knowledge from receptive to productive mode is among the most important but less studied strands of second or foreign language learning. The present study served as an attempt to shed light on this issue by taking into account the trait of willingness to communicate as an indicator of learners’ capability in promoting their lexical knowledge from receptive to productive status. It, in fact, sought to examine the role of willingness to communicate, as a type of individual difference, in the receptive/productive vocabulary knowledge of learners. The hypothesis underlying the study is that WTC can be regarded as a good predictor for not only the degree of learners’ receptive and productive lexical knowledge size, but also as an indication of learners’ success in transition of their word knowledge from receptive to productive mode. To accomplish this, 104 Iranian EFL learners were chosen to act as the study participants. They were given three different instruments (one to identify their willingness to communicate degree, one for measuring receptive vocabulary knowledge, and one for calculating their productive knowledge). Having gathered and analyzed the intended data, the study showed that high and low willingness to communicate learners had almost the same receptive lexical knowledge. Furthermore, it was revealed that learners with high level of willingness to communicate had more productive vocabulary knowledge than those with low level of willingness to communicate. Lastly, the study implied that willingness to communicate might be taken as a predictor of learners’ transition of lexical knowledge from receptive to productive mode.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavieh, A. (2002). Introduction to research in education. Thomson Learning: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel, D. P. (1963). The Psychology of meaningful verbal learning. New York: Grune and Stratton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). New York: Pearson Education Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao, Y., & Philp, J. (2006). Interactional context and willingness to communicate: A comparison of behavior in whole class, group, and dyadic interaction. System, 36, 480–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. B. (1968). The psychology of language testing. In A. Davies (Ed.), Language testing symposium: A psycholinguistic perspective. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caspi, T., & Lowie, W. (2014). The dynamics of L2 vocabulary development: A case study of receptive and productive knowledge (pp. 1–26). Belo Horizonte: RBLA.

    Google Scholar 

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

  • Chapelle, C. A. (1998). Construct definition and validity inquiry in SLA research. In L. F. Bachman & A. D. Cohen (Eds.), Interfaces between second language acquisition and language testing research (pp. 32–70). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chu, H. R. (2008). Shyness and EFL learning in Taiwan: A study of shy and non-shy college students’ use of strategies, foreign language anxiety, motivation and willingness to communicate. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Texas, Austin.

  • Clark, E. (1993). The lexicon in acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Corson, D. J. (1995). Using English words. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic wordlist. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 213–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crow, J. (1986). Receptive vocabulary acquisition for reading comprehension. Modern Language Journal., 70(3), 242–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dörnyei, Z. (2009). Individual differences: Interplay of learner characteristics and learning environment. Language Learning, 59, 230–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, M. (2000). How big is the gap and how to narrow it? An investigation into the active and passive vocabulary knowledge of L2 learners. RELC Journal, 31(2), 105–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, J., & Tschirner, E. (2017). The contribution of vocabulary knowledge to reading proficiency: The case of college Russian. Foreign Language Annals, 50, 500–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagtvet, B. (1980). On the relation between language comprehension and language production in a social psychological perspective. Revue de phonetique Applique, 55–56, 289–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington, M., & Carey, M. (2009). The on-line Yes/No test as a placement tool. System, 37(4), 614–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriksen, B. (1999). Three dimensions of vocabulary development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 303–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258–286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Khajavy, G. H., Ghonsooly, B., Fatemi, A. H., & Choi, C. (2016). Willingness to communicate in English: A microsystem model in the Iranian EFL classroom context. TESOL Quarterly, 50(1), 154–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S. J. (2004). Exploring willingness to communicate in English among Korean EFL students in Korea: Willingness to communicate as a predictor of success in second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Ohio State University, Ohio.

  • Knell, E., & Chi, Y. (2012). The roles of motivation, affective attitudes, and willingness to communicate among Chinese students in early English immersion programs. International Education, 41(2), 65–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koizumi, R. (2005). Relationships between productive vocabulary knowledge and speaking performance of Japanese learners of English at the novice level. Retrieved 3rd October, 2013 from http://www.tulips.tsukuba.ac.jp/limedio/dlam.

  • Lambert, N. M., & McCombs, B. L. (Eds.). (1998). How students learn. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, B. (1998). The development of passive and active vocabulary in a second language: Same or different? Applied Linguistics, 19, 255–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, B., Elder, C., Hill, K., & Congdon, P. (2004). Size and strength: Do we need both to measure vocabulary knowledge? Language Testing, 21(2), 202–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, B., & Goldstein, Z. (2004). Testing vocabulary knowledge: Size, strength, and computer adaptiveness. Language Learning, 54, 399–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 307–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, B., & Paribakht, T. S. (1998). The relationship between passive and active vocabularies: Effects of language learning context. Language Learning, 48(3), 365–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. H., & Muncie, J. (2006). From receptive to productive: Improving ESL learners’ use of vocabulary in a post reading composition task. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 295–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, M. (2007). The lexical diversity of short texts: Exploring the productive-receptive continuum of lexical knowledge. In J. Horváth & M. Nikolov (Eds.), UPRT 2007: Empirical studies in English applied linguistics (pp. 293–305). Pécs: Lingua Franca Csoport.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, G., & Razin, R. (2007). On the limits of communication in multidimensional Cheap talk: A comment. Econometrica, 75(3), 885–893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, Y. (2007). Willingness to communicate in intercultural interactions between Chinese and Americans. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Wyoming.

  • MacIntyre, P. D., Clement, R., Dornyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The modern Language Journal, 82, 545–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, P. D., & Doucette, J. (2009). Willingness to communicate and action control. System, 38, 161–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1992). Thinking, problem solving, cognition (2nd ed.). New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1987). Willingness to communicate. In J. C. McCroskey & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Personality and interpersonal communication (pp. 119–131). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meara, P. (1990). A note on passive vocabulary. Second Language Research, 6, 150–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meara, P. (1996). The dimensions of lexical competence. In G. Brown, K. Malmkjaer, & J. Williams (Eds.), Performance and competence in second language acquisition (pp. 35–53). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meara, P. (1997). Towards a new approach to modeling vocabulary acquisition. In N. Schmitt & M. Mc Carthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 109–121). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melka, F. (1997). Receptive versus productive aspects of vocabulary. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition, and pedagogy (pp. 84–102). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melka Teichroew, F. J. (1982). Receptive vs. productive vocabulary: A survey. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 6, 5–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milton, J. (2009). Measuring second language vocabulary acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Min, H. (2008). EFL Vocabulary acquisition and retention: Reading plus vocabulary enhancement activities and narrow reading. Language Learning, 58(1), 73–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mondria, J. A., & Wiersma, B. (2004). Receptive, productive, and receptive + productive L2 vocabulary learning: What difference does it make? In Paul Bogaards & Batia Laufer (Eds.), Vocabulary in a second Language: Selection, acquisition, and testing (pp. 79–100). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, L., & Cobb, T. (2003). Vocabulary profiles as predictors of the academic performance of Teaching English as a Foreign Language trainees. System, 32, 75–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Heinle & Heinle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, I. S. P., & Ming-Tzu, K. W. (1999). Graded readers and vocabulary. Reading in a Foreign Language, 12, 355–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2001). Changing Perspectives on Good Language Learners. TESOL Quarterly, 35(2), 307–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okamoto, M. (2007). Lexical attrition in Japanese university students: A case study. JACET Journal, 44, 71–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paradis, M. (2009). Declarative and procedural determinants of second languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 174–200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peker, H., Regalla, M., & Cox, T. D. (2018). Teaching and learning vocabulary in context: Examining engagement in three prekindergarten French classrooms. Foreign Language Annals, 51(2), 472–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, J., & Woodrow, L. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English: A model in the Chinese EFL classroom context. Language Learning, 60, 834–876. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00576.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pignot-Shahov, V. (2012). Measuring L2 receptive and productive Vocabulary knowledge. Language Studies Working Papers, 4, 37–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, J. C. (1976). The role of vocabulary teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 10, 77–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roehr, K. (2008). Linguistic and metalinguistic categories in second language learning. Cognitive Linguistics, 19, 67–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, J., & Thompson, I. (1982). How to be a more successful language learner. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savignon, S. J. (2005). Communicative language teaching: Strategies, and goals. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 561–653). Mahwa, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary. A vocabulary research manual. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N., & Meara, P. (1997). Researching vocabulary through a word knowledge framework: Word associations and verbal suffixes. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(1), 17–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behavior of two new versions of the vocabulary levels test. Language Testing, 18(1), 55–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, J., & Lew-Williams, C. (2016). Repetition across successive sentences facilitates young children’s word learning. Developmental Psychology, 52, 879–886.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spoelman, M., & Verspoor, M. (2010). Dynamic patterns in the development of accuracy and complexity: A longitudinal case study on the acquisition of Finnish. Applied Linguistics, 31(4), 532–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Springer, S. (2004). Making the jump: From receptive to productive vocabulary control. EDSL Journal, 2, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strevens, P. (1992). English as an international language. In B. B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue: English across cultures (pp. 27–47). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suksawas, W. (2011). A sociocultural study of EFL learners’ willingness to communicate. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Wollongonk, Thailand.

  • Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 285–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Syed, H., & Kuzborska, I. (2018). Dynamics of factors underlying willingness to communicate in a second language. The Language Learning Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2018.1435709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Truscott, J. (1998). Noticing in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 14(2), 103–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vongsila, V., & Reinders, H. (2016). Making Asian learners talk: Encouraging willingness to communicate. RELC Journal, 47(3), 331–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waner, K. K., & Winter, J. K. (1993). The multidimensional communication process: A communication paradigm for the 21st century. ERIC Journal, 4, 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waring, R. (1997a). A study of receptive and productive learning from word cards. Studies in Foreign Languages and Literature, 21, 94–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waring, R. (1997b). A comparison of the receptive and productive vocabulary sizes of some second language learners (pp. 53–68). Immaculata: Notre Dame Seishin University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waring, R., & Takaki, M. (2003). At what rate do learners learn and retain new vocabulary from reading a graded reader? Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(2), 130–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wattanakul, A. (2001). Learning in Thai context. KMUTT, 22(3), 23–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, S. (2007). Willingness to communicate in EFL environments. Issues in Language Teaching and Learning, 2, 23–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(1), 33–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, S. (2008). Receptive and productive vocabulary sizes of L2 learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(1), 79–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, Y. (1999). Teaching collocations for productive vocabulary development. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, New York.

  • Yamamoto, Y. (2011). Bridging the gap between receptive and productive vocabulary size through extensive reading. Reading Matrix, 11(3), 226–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. Modern Language Journal, 86, 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, M. (2009). Willingness to communicate of foreign language learners in a Chinese setting. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Florida State University, Florida.

  • Yu, G. (2010). Lexical diversity in writing and speaking task performances. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 236–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhong, H. (2012). Multidimensional vocabulary knowledge: Development from receptive to productive use. In D. Hirsh (Ed.), Current perspectives in second language research (pp. 23–56). Switzerland: Peter Lang AG, International Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhong, H., & Hirsh, D. (2009). Vocabulary growth in an English as a foreign language context. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 4, 85–113.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran

    Kamal Heidari

Authors
  1. Kamal Heidari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kamal Heidari.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Heidari, K. Willingness to Communicate: A Predictor of Pushing Vocabulary Knowledge from Receptive to Productive. J Psycholinguist Res 48, 903–920 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-019-09639-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-019-09639-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation