See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/216308656

A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL

Article in Language Culture and Curriculum · January 2003

DOI: 10.1080/07908310308666654

CITATIONS READS

388 6,901

2 authors, including:

Richard Clément
University of Ottawa
158 PUBLICATIONS 14,775 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Richard Clément on 01 December 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

A Chinese Conceptualisation of
Willingness to Communicate in ESL
W.P. Wen
College of Foreign Languages, Xiangtan University, Hunan, 411105,
People’s Republic of China
Richard Clément
School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, 125 University, Room 415A,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1N 6N5
MacIntyre et al.’s (1998) heuristic model of willingness to communicate (WTC) is
based on research principally conducted in the western world. The goal of this paper
is to amend the WTC model so as to reect more closely the situation found in
English language Chinese classrooms. We try to extend MacIntyre et al.’s model in
two ways: by changing some structural relationships between constructs included
in the model and by reinterpreting some of the variables from a Chinese perspective.
An examination of the basic concept of Confucianism and the teaching of Confucian
Classics reveals that cultural values are the dominant force shaping the individual’s
perception and way of learning, which is manifested in L2 communication. We give
an account of the linguistic, communicative and social psychological variables that
might affect students’ willingness to communicate in a Chinese setting. Potential
relations between these variables and Chinese cultural values are exempliŽed.

There are more people learning English in China than there are people who
speak English in the United States (Bryson, 1990). It is widely recognised that
while Chinese students are very good at grammar-based written examin-
ations, they are poor speakers, often designated as ‘reticent learners’ who lack
the willingness to communicate (WTC). A fundamental issue of L2 research
in China, therefore, is how to generate students’ willingness to communicate
in classroom settings in order to improve their oral proŽciency and thus
further improve the effectiveness of English language teaching (ELT).
In this article, we present a Chinese conceptualisation of willingness to
speak English based on the heuristic WTC model of MacIntyre et al. (1998).
While recognising the existence of an empirical literature pertaining to learn-
ing English in China, our contribution is based on an analysis of the impli-
cations of traditional Chinese philosophy and values. First, therefore, we
explore the deep roots underlying Chinese students’ apparent unwillingness
to communicate. An examination of the basic concept of Confucianism and
the teaching of Confucian Classics reveals that cultural values are the domi-
nant force shaping the individual’s perceptions and ways of learning, which
are likewise manifested in L2 communication (Hu, 2002). Next, we give an
account of the linguistic, communicative and social psychological variables
that might affect the willingness of students to communicate in a Chinese
setting. Potential relations between these variables and Chinese cultural values
are described in the context of proposed modiŽcations to MacIntyre et al.’s

0790-8318/03/01 0018-21 $20.00/0 Ó 2003 W.P. Wen & R. Clément

LANGUAGE, CULTURE AND CURRICULUM Vol. 16, No. 1, 2003

18
A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL 19

(1998) model. Finally, we draw some empirical implications of the model. The
article is a general comment on WTC in the Chinese situation, but because in
China ESL is acquired mostly in classroom settings, the focus is on that situ-
ation.
English, a mandatory academic subject in all secondary schools and higher
education institutions and a major subject in many universities (Ting, 1987),
is learned as a foreign language throughout China. As learners lack direct
exposure to authentic English-speaking individuals, they invest a great deal
of time in painstaking efforts to achieve the desired proŽciency. It is estimated
that, for average non-English majors, English takes up 20–25% of their study
and extracurricular time. After so much time and effort, it is expected that
students should have a good command of the language, both oral and written.
Years of effort, however, often result in a sufŽcient grasp of only written
English. Students are usually proŽcient in grammar and vocabulary (Wang,
1999). They are able to read with good comprehension and to write grammati-
cally correct English. As a result, they achieve remarkably high scores on the
TOEFL, GRE and CET exams (Cheng, 1997). Many managers in Chinese–
American joint-venture enterprises, however, complain that the personnel
they employ cannot carry out simple English conversations in real-life situ-
ations despite their high test scores. Learners speak the language as if they
had never heard it (Cheng, 1997), a dilemma in teaching English in China.
The causes of this phenomenon are complex. One thing, however, is certain:
students lack involvement in oral communication. It could be either that stu-
dents do not have the opportunity to communicate in class because of large
class size, or that when given the opportunity, they are not fully engaged,
sometimes indicating an unwillingness to communicate. We now turn to this
latter phenomenon.

Cultural Origins of Unwillingness to Communicate

In our view, Chinese students’ unwillingness to communicate in public is
not a language phenomenon that is speciŽc to learning the English language.
It is deeply rooted in Chinese philosophy and culture, Žnding expression in
two aspects governing interpersonal relations: an other-directed self and a
submissive way of learning.

Other-directed self
Kessing (1974) argues that culture provides its members with an implicit
theory about how to behave in different situations and how to interpret the
behaviour of others in these situations. In the literature on intercultural com-
munication, the concepts of individualism and collectivism are used to explain
similarities and differences in these implicit theories across cultures
(Gudykunst, 1998). As Gudykunst (1998: 108) puts it, ‘individualism and col-
lectivism exist in all cultures, but one pattern tends to predominate’. Chinese
culture, as is commonly recognised, is more collectivistic. Although the collec-
tivistic aspect of traditional Chinese society is gradually losing its structural
strength and functional importance (Yang, 1981) during the course of modern-
isation, collectivistic values still contribute signiŽcantly to the shaping of the
Chinese self and to one’s perception of the relationship between self and
20 Language, Culture and Curriculum

others or the outside world. Two speciŽc facets of the other-directed self, ‘face-
protection’ and the ‘insider effect’, seem relevant here.

Face-protected orientation
The collectivistic value of Chinese culture is derived from Confucianism.
Jen (benevolence, humanity) is its basic concept, which expresses the Confu-
cian ideal of cultivating human relations, developing human faculties, and
sublimating one’s personality (Chai & Chai, 1965). A composite of ‘two’ and
‘man’, Jen stresses the notion that only in the presence of the other, will the
self be signiŽcant. For Confucius, the self did not exit as a single entity. Its
existential reality is dialectically related to the family, the community, the
nation and the world (Chai & Chai, 1965). Self is relational, and it is deŽned
by the surrounding relations (Gao, 1998). In Chinese culture, the social and
moral process of ‘conducting oneself’ is to be aware of one’s relations with
others. Chinese people can never separate themselves from obligation to
others (King & Bond, 1985). When children are young, both teachers and par-
ents teach them appropriate behaviours which will be appreciated and spoken
favourably of by the adults. When they grow older, they become sensitive to
this social evaluation and care about their own self in relation to others. They
are radiant with joy when praised, show little restraint in the company of
friends, but once in public, they are very cautious and mind their behaviour
(Wen, 1999) so as to avoid disapproval. All in all, the Chinese care very much
about the evaluation of the signiŽcant others. In any given task or situation,
signiŽcant others always come to mind:

What will others think?

What will others evaluate?
How will others respond?

While overwhelmed by such thoughts, the Chinese would attend to the

judgement of the public toward their activities and orient themselves toward
the verdicts of others. The speciŽc consequences of this social orientation are
elaborated by Yang (1981: 159):

… submission to social expectations, and worry about external opinions

in an attempt to achieve one or more of the purposes of reward attain-
ment, harmony maintenance, impression management, face protection,
social acceptance, and avoidance of punishment, embarrassment, con-
ict, rejection, ridicule and retaliation in a social situation.

The above behaviour patterns are all common among Chinese, with face
protection as the typical tendency. In L2 learning, which involves ‘an alter-
nation of self-image, and the adoption of new social and cultural behaviours
and ways of being’ (Williams & Burden, 1997: 115), it seems likely that Chinese
students would be even more sensitive to the judgement of the public upon
their language behaviours and, therefore, less likely to get involved in class-
room communication. This may translate into lack of practice in the oral mode
and thus impede development of L2 speaking ability.
A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL 21

The insider effect

The other-directedness is also characterised by a sense of group belong-
ingness, which draws a clear line between ingroups and outgroups, and, at
the same time, maintains a large psychological distance between insiders and
outsiders. A Chinese cultural expectation is that insiders and outsiders should
not be treated in the same way because insiders share a sense of unity and
interdependence (Wierzbicka, 1996). According to Carr (1973), Chinese divide
people into two categories: those they know intimately (insiders) and those
they do not know – strangers (outsiders). The Chinese are very cautious in
their contact with strangers, while to the insiders, high levels of familiarity
and obligation are involved. Insider relations are ‘personal in nature and
maintained primarily for their intrinsic, afŽliated qualities’ (Chu, 1979: 9). In
traditional Chinese culture, Žve t’ung (same) relations serve as a good
example. T’ung tsung refers to relations between individuals bearing the same
surname. T’ung tsu is the relationship between individuals belonging to the
same kinship network. T’ung hsiang refers to relations between individuals
from the same native ‘place’. T’ung hsueh concerns relations between individ-
uals who went to the same school or studied under the same master. T’ung
shih refers to relations between individuals who have the same career afŽli-
ation (Chu, 1979). In elaborating the nature of these ingroup relations, Chu
(1979: 9) further points out, ‘each of the t’ung relations carried its own kind
of attachment which was meant to be permanent and binding’. The traditional
Žve t’ung ingroup relations still Žnd expression in such relations as family
members, friends or others with whom one has established a special relation-
ship (Gao, 1998), people in the same work unit or production group and
people with the same interest or hobby.
The Chinese keep a certain distance not only from outgroup members, but
also from the outgroup culture. Chinese people do not feel comfortable with
or knowledgeable about outgroup culture. It usually takes a long time, if it is
possible at all, for a Chinese person to adjust to and accept a new culture.
When new things are encountered, they are perceived as different and distant
for a long time before they are accepted. Even when the Chinese live in the
target community, they still adopt a ‘keep-away’ attitude toward that culture
and they still perceive the native speakers as outsiders. This probably accounts
for the Chinatown found in almost every major western city of the world,
where the Chinese remain faithful to Chinese food and Chinese customs and
live in Chinese circles. It is quite common to Žnd Chinese people who have
lived in a foreign community for over a decade and have never had close
contact with native speakers. Furthermore, it is not uncommon to Žnd Chinese
people living in the United States for many years who have not improved
their English. People used to attribute the inefŽciency of foreign language
learning to the lack of authentic language stimulation, but once in a native
environment, most Chinese still adhere almost exclusively to their ingroup.
As Chu (1979: 11) concludes, in a culture in which social relations are per-
meated with affect deŽned in terms of ingroups, ‘the pace of cultural change
would be slow and the process of adjustment would be difŽcult, because it
would take time for the tradition oriented affect to be modiŽed’.
How might the insider effect inuence Chinese L2 learners’ willingness to
22 Language, Culture and Curriculum

communicate? Individuals who are ingroup-oriented are likely to choose to

function within the conŽnes of their ingroup and keep a certain distance from
members of other groups. This social and psychological distance (Schumann,
1978) impedes adaptation to a new culture, and as a result, when they have
the opportunity to interact with outgroup culture or to practice outgroup lang-
uage they feel uncomfortable and shy away from it, showing an unwillingness
to undertake the social interaction needed in order to succeed in L2 learning
(Hinenoya & Gatbonton, 2000).

A submissive way of learning

Submission to authority, a recognised tendency in Chinese culture, provides
another way to look at Chinese students’ reluctance to participate in classroom
communication. The tendency of Chinese teachers to play an authoritative
role and of Chinese students to submit to authority in the process of learning
goes back to Confucianism and the teaching of Confucian Classics. In Imperial
China, ‘the whole process of learning and education was oriented to the mech-
anical memorisation of ideals of antiquity, principally the Four Books and Five
Great Classics’ (Pratt, 1992: 302). Scholars spent years reciting and explaining
them ‘in a way that conformed to the orthodox interpretation’ (Ting, 1987:
51). It was believed that those who were thoroughly acquainted with the
ancient texts would also know the ways and means to proper behaviour and
would be able to employ this knowledge as government ofŽcials (Scovel,
1983). Until 1862, education in China was focused on the reading of Classics
in family schools. Silent reading, reading aloud, calligraphy and writing were
the four basic aspects that the family schools emphasised (Shu, 1961). In these
family schools, the teacher was the authority, the know-all. Students were
submissive to the dominant role of the teacher and learned the Classics by
rote. Atmosphere was formal with a distinction between the teacher and the
students. Although this traditional way of acquiring knowledge has gradually
faded away, its cultural values die hard. In English teaching today, we can
still Žnd traces of this tradition, which can be characterised as teacher depen-
dent with over-emphasis on self correction. First, the teacher is assumed to
be expert in a content area, and experienced in the knowledge and skill to be
taught (Pratt, 1992). The language teacher is regarded as the authority in the
classroom as he or she is the source of language stimulation and a model of
the native target language. Ting (1987) notes:
Since the values of universal reverence were held to be embodied in the
Classics, those who explain the Classics were naturally assigned absol-
ute, unchallengeable authority. The Confucian model of the stratiŽed
social hierarchy was transplanted into the classroom. The teacher’s
words were always truths and truths were to be parroted and memorised
but not to be questioned.
For the Chinese, passing on knowledge is one of the basic professional obli-
gations of a teacher, and in the language classroom, ‘providing background
knowledge, explaining passages and contexts, giving answers to controversial
questions, [and] lecturing on the subject’ (Yu, 1984: 36) are seen as ways to
pass on this knowledge. They remain common practice in most Chinese
A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL 23

classrooms, although there is an increasing emphasis on a student-centred

communicative approach with the deepening of education reform and the
increasing demands for communicatively competent graduates. In recent
years, the Beijing Foreign Language Research Press and Shanghai Foreign Lan-
guage Education Press have undertaken an important project to train English
teachers nationwide so as to promote a student-centred, communicative-ori-
ented approach. It has helped to improve the situation but it has also met
with difŽculties (c.f. Hu, 2002). Once students are no longer in the teacher-
centred classroom to which they are so accustomed, they may not feel that
they are learning. They complain that too much time is being wasted and
insist that the teacher lectures more. Both students and their teachers tend to
believe that learners’ English proŽciency is built on the teacher’s lectures
rather than on their own practice.
With the honouring of the Classics comes the second tendency: the enthusi-
asm for grammar, the ‘law’ of the English language, as it is viewed. To Chinese
students, ‘every phenomenon in language must come to grammar for its Žnal
judgement. A great satisfaction is felt in sentences that can be logically
explained and justiŽed by grammar’ (Ting, 1987: 54). From the secondary level
on, students invest a great deal of time and energy in grammar for the prep-
aration of written examination. They single out grammatical rules, learn them
by rote and then try to match these rules with sentences that they encounter.
As students have memorised so many rules so well, it is natural that, in due
time, they are rule-ridden and tend to monitor themselves all the time, con-
stantly checking their output against their conscious knowledge of English.
When it comes to communication, they are so concerned with correctness that
they tend to hesitate, avoid speaking or withdraw. Even if they venture an
utterance, they may constantly self-correct, leaving a sentence half Žnished.
This lack of real uency discourages them and decreases their willingness to
communicate. Often, students attribute their lack of uency in communication
to poor mastery of grammar and work even harder on grammar at the expense
of participation in language practice.
Thus far, we have traced the roots of Chinese students’ unwillingness to
communicate. It is clear that cultural values are essential factors inuencing
students’ perceptions and ways of learning. As cultural values vary, so do
individual communicative behaviours, and the conceptualisation of willing-
ness to communicate. Taking cultural values as a starting point, we will next
consider the willingness to communicate (WTC) model and propose a rein-
terpretation applied to a Chinese setting.

WTC in the Chinese Setting

The concept of WTC was developed and introduced into the communication
literature by McCroskey and Baer (1985) and McCroskey and Richmond
(1986), based on the earlier work of Burgoon (1976). It was enriched by MacIn-
tyre and his colleagues (1998) who have extended it to second language usage
and identiŽed several additional inuences in L2 communication. In MacIn-
tyre et al.’s (1998) heuristic model, the construct is conceptualised as a situ-
ational tendency with both transient and enduring inuences rather than as
a trait-like variable as proposed by McCroskey. The pyramid-shaped structure
24 Language, Culture and Curriculum

(Figure 1) contains six categories or variables referred to as layers of the

model, with the more situation-speciŽc inuences as the top three layers and
more stable, enduring inuences as the bottom three layers.
In their model, MacIntyre et al. (1998) have drawn together research and
theory from various domains and integrated previous research in linguistics,
communication and language learning. The potential interrelations of these
domains are clearly stated. However, this heuristic model of willingness to
communicate is based on research principally conducted in the western world.
In a Chinese setting, where the culture is built mainly on Confucianism with
an emphasis on the collective, willingness to communicate is a far more com-
plicated notion entailing the interplay of affect, the teacher and the learner’s
environment. As stated earlier, face concern and the insider effect make it less
likely for the learners to venture into a discourse with others in the L2 in or
out of class. English, a language of the outgroup, is perceived as something
different and something they approach at the risk of losing face if they cannot
speak it properly. The value of submission to authority prevents them from
interacting freely with the signiŽcant others, both the teacher and the peers.
Figure 2 presents our schematic representation of the impact of Chinese cul-
tural values on WTC.
SpeciŽcally, our discussion concerns the relationship between desire to com-
municate (DC, Layer III) and WTC (Layer II). As illustrated in Figure 2, in a
Chinese setting, a number of factors intervene in the link between these two

Figure 1 MacIntyre et al.’s (1998) heuristic model of variables inuencing WTC

A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL 25

Figure 2 Variables moderating the relation between DC and WTC in the Chinese
EFL classroom

constructs that are otherwise represented as proximate in the original model.

Furthermore, as will be shown, a number of these intervening factors are
located elsewhere, more distally in MacIntyre et al.’s (1998) model. In the fol-
lowing, we are thus proposing alterations to both the factors impinging on
WTC and their structural position in the dynamics of the model.

Desire and willingness to communicate

A distinction is made between desire and willingness in our conceptualis-
ation. Desire refers to a deliberate choice or preference, while willingness
emphasises the readiness to act. WTC is deŽned as ‘a readiness to enter into
discourse at a particular time with a speciŽc person or persons, using a L2’
(MacIntyre et al., 1998: 547). Having the desire to communicate does not neces-
sarily imply a willingness to communicate. For example, a student intending
to ask a question in class may withdraw due to anxiety or the tense atmos-
phere. The student may have the desire to communicate, but is affectively
unprepared, which results in an unwillingness to communicate. Similarly, the
fact that Chinese students are generally quiet, slow to respond and reluctant
to communicate does not imply that they are born communication-inhibited
or that they do not have the internal desire or motive to interact with others.
The need for interaction and the desire to communicate are universal. How-
ever, between the desire and the readiness to enter into a discourse, one may
undergo a complex process with cognitive and affective factors interacting
with each other. In the case of Chinese students overwhelmed with their tra-
ditional social orientation, only when they feel effectively comfortable, will
they feel they will not run the risk of losing face in the presence of signiŽcant
others, and will be willing to engage in speech.
The variables in our conceptualisation include societal context, personality
factors, motivational orientations and affective perceptions. They are positive-
affect related in the sense that they help build a positive communication
environment – the promotion of engagement and reduction of anxiety. These
variables are also culturally bound or culturally speciŽc to the extent that
26 Language, Culture and Curriculum

they reect such cultural values as social orientation, the insider effect and
submission to the authority of teachers and grammar we have previously dis-
cussed. Although they are placed in Figure 2 in different positions along the
axis leading from DC to WTC, no hypothesis is made here concerning the
temporal sequence of their inuence.
Societal context
At the societal context level, MacIntyre et al.’s (1998) model (Layer VI)
emphasises the intergroup climate. It deŽnes communication in a general
sense, from a multilingual, North American point of view where ‘ethnoling-
uistic vitality’ – those societal characteristics ensuring the survival of a langu-
age including demographic representation, prestige and institutional support
(Giles et al., 1977) – is a key social issue inuencing individual behaviours. In
our conceptualisation, communication is conŽned to classroom settings where
the role of the group and the authority of the teacher deŽne the classroom
atmosphere in Chinese culture, exerting direct inuence on the students’ WTC.
Two aspects seem important here: group cohesiveness and teacher support.
Group cohesiveness
Cohesiveness, in social psychology, is ‘the degree to which the group
coheres or “hangs together”’ (Shaw, 1981: 197). According to Shaw (1981),
there are three different meanings attached to this term: (1) attraction to the
group; (2) the level of motivation evidenced by the group members; and (3)
coordination of efforts of group members. Most people who use this term
today accept the version of being motivated to remain in the group (Nixon,
1979). It is ‘the resultant of all the forces acting on the members to remain in
the group’ (Festinger, 1950: 274).
It is important to note that the conceptualisation of group cohesiveness in
western literature is mainly conŽned to socio-emotional and instrumental
dimensions and is situationally dependent and subject to change to a greater
degree than in Chinese culture. For the former, cohesiveness is based on inter-
personal attraction among group members, and emotional satisfaction pro-
vided by participation in the group is emphasised. For the latter, cohesiveness
is based on task attractiveness, referring to the satisfaction of achieving goals
that could not effectively be attained outside the group context. Successful
completion of the task is emphasised (Tziner, 1982). These two dimensions of
cohesiveness may not bear enduring inuences on student willingness to
engage in interaction with group members. Group cohesiveness in the Chinese
setting stems from social orientation with the insider effect as its basic cultural
value. The insider relations entail close contact, intimate touch and attachment
among ingroup members, which nurses a sense of ‘oneness’, ‘we-ness’ and
‘belongingness’ (Hogg, 1992).
According to the intergroup model (Giles et al., 1977), strong ingroup identi-
Žcation may prevent learners from actively interacting with the outgroup cul-
ture and practising the outgroup language, thus impeding the acquisition of
communicative proŽciency in the L2. In a Chinese setting where acquisition
takes place mostly in classrooms with formal instruction, the classroom cli-
mate is essential to foster willingness to practice the L2. Therefore, the insider
effect, contributing to a supportive climate, may actually help enhance WTC.
A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL 27

The factor closely linked to group cohesiveness is class size. In a large class,
it is difŽcult to nurse a sense of intimacy and belongingness, and as a result,
affective problems arise. Students do not get teacher attention in a crowded
classroom, they feel less at ease and more self-conscious. Subsequently, they
will be on the defensive and tend to withdraw – a phenomenon which fre-
quently occurs in Chinese classrooms. China has a very large English-learning
population. When this population is divided into classes in universities, it is
common to Žnd English classes with 60 or 70 students (Leng, 1997). In most
large English classes, students are not willing to interact, simply because there
are too many people leaving little room for close contact and thus the class
lacks the kind of cohesiveness to back them up and make them feel secure if
they venture to speak. Consequently, they refrain from speaking unless asked
to do so by their teachers. Obviously, class size is part of the contextual factors
embedded in group cohesiveness.
Group cohesiveness may be regarded as a continuum ranging from low to
high (Barker et al., 1991). Shaw (1981) found that high group cohesiveness is
positively related to group productivity, satisfaction, social inuence in the
group and interaction. Shaw’s theory and our conceptualisation share the con-
cern that high group cohesiveness leads to engagement and a pleasant feeling
(a reduced anxiety) and thus willingness to communicate, given that the mem-
bers are motivated with task orientation or preoccupied with the prestige of
group members.

Teacher support
In school, teachers exert a signiŽcant and determining socio-cultural inu-
ence on student engagement (Reeve, 1996). Csikszentmihalyi and McCormack
(1986) point out that the single most important opportunity young people
have to internalise educational aspirations and positive attitudes toward
school comes from time spent with teachers. Teachers’ attitude, involvement,
immediacy and teaching styles promote student engagement and positive
effect. It is perhaps teacher involvement and teacher immediacy that are the
most effective.
Teacher involvement refers to the quality of the interpersonal relationship
between a teacher and his or her students, as well as the teacher’s willingness
to dedicate psychological resources to students (Reeve, 1996). Reeve (1996)
further argues that teacher involvement Žnds embodiment in taking time for
students’ concerns, expressing affection, enjoying interaction with students,
paying attention to students’ needs and emotions, and dedicating resources
to students. Teachers high in involvement show affection (liking,
appreciation), care, attunement (understanding, sympathy), dependability
(availability in case of need), interest in and detailed knowledge about the
students. When students perceive teachers to be high in involvement, they
feel less watched and evaluated, and experience greater emotional security
(Connell & Wellborn, 1991), join in more interactions and show more enthusi-
asm (Skinner & Belmont, 1993).
The immediacy construct was developed by Mehrabian (1969: 203) referring
to those communication behaviours that ‘enhance closeness to and nonverbal
interaction with another’. Immediacy behaviours are those that reduce the
28 Language, Culture and Curriculum

distance between people – actual physical proximity or psychological distance

(Mehrabian, 1971). Andersen (1979), seeing the signiŽcance for educational
research, applied it to the classroom. Since then, teacher immediacy has
received considerable attention in the literature on instructional communi-
cation.
Immediacy, like communication behaviours, may be verbal or non-verbal.
Verbal immediacy refers to such behaviours as use of personal examples,
using ‘we’ and ‘our’, using students’ Žrst name, and using humour in class
(Mehrabian, 1971). Non-verbal immediacy refers to those approach behaviours
which increase or produce interpersonal closeness, sensory stimulation and
signal warmth and friendliness, including positive head nods, smiles, eye con-
tact, vocal expressiveness and close physical distance (Andersen et al., 1979).
The positive inuence of teacher immediacy on students has been noticed
by researchers over the years. Andersen (1979) investigated teacher immedi-
acy in the classroom and found that there is a positive correlation between
teacher immediacy and students’ affective learning. Christophel (1990) and
Richmond (1990) found that immediacy is positively related to motivation,
which is positively related to affective and cognitive learning. Frymier’s (1993,
1994) investigation of the impact of teacher immediacy on student motivation
came to similar conclusions. In view of this, it is reasonable to conclude that
‘the immediacy construct closely parallels other constructs that predict high
affect in an interaction, such as attraction, afŽnity, and solidarity’ (Andersen,
1979: 545). Immediate teachers communicate positive attitudes or approach
orientation resulting in perceptions of interpersonal closeness, sensory stimu-
lation, warmth and friendliness (Rodriguez et al., 1996), thus minimising anxi-
ety and increasing student engagement.
Both teacher involvement and teacher immediacy are of special importance
in the Chinese setting, where the hierarchical social relationship places teach-
ers in the position of authority. ‘A teacher one day and a father all life’. This
Chinese saying means that if someone is your teacher for even one single day,
you should treat him as your father all your life. The father is all-powerful in
the family in old China. What underlies this saying is the discrimination
between teachers and students. Students should respect teachers, and teachers,
as Žgures of authority and signiŽcant others, are a source of threat. When
students perceive their teachers as approachable, dependable and facilitating
access to resources, however, they feel emotionally secure and sufŽciently
motivated with a reduced affective Žlter and increased engagement. Therefore,
in the Chinese English classroom, teacher involvement and immediacy can be
regarded as a signiŽcant precursor of a student’s positive affect, and would
be expected to increase willingness to communicate.

Personality factors
An individual’s personality may facilitate or inhibit language learning. In
MacIntyre et al.’s (1998) model, ‘the Big Five’ represent the personality traits,
which set the individual context in which language use occurs. There is good
evidence that these personality factors are universal (Saklofske & Zeidner,
1995). The behaviour expression of these dispositions, however, is greatly
inuenced by social context, situations and environment. Risk-taking and tol-
A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL 29

erance of ambiguity seem more affectively related and culturally signiŽcant

when taking into consideration the collectivistic outlook of the Chinese.

Risk-taking
Risk-taking is generally deŽned as ‘any consciously, or nonconsciously con-
trolled behaviour with a perceived uncertainty about its outcome’ (Trimpop,
1994: 9). Language class risk-taking, however, is more narrowly focused. It
refers to an individual’s tendency to assume risk in using the L2 in the second
language class (Ely, 1986), and it also involves the willingness to risk social
embarrassment or smirks in front of one’s peers (Beebe, 1983; Jonassen & Gra-
bowski, 1993). Ely (1986) further argues that language class risk-taking
involves four dimensions: a lack of hesitancy about using a newly encountered
linguistic element; a willingness to use complex or difŽcult linguistic elements;
a tolerance of possible incorrectness while using the language; and an incli-
nation to practice a new element silently before speaking it aloud. Good langu-
age learners are supposed to be risk-takers (Beebe, 1983; Naiman et al., 1975;
Rubin, 1975). They are willing to guess, willing to appear foolish and willing
to try out new structures about which they are unsure.
In communication settings, not all students are willing to take risks. In fact,
many students are cautious in communication settings which harbour a poten-
tial threat, as Beebe (1983: 40) describes:

They fear looking ridiculous; they fear the frustration coming from a
listener’s blank look, showing that they have failed to communicate; they
fear the danger of not being able to take care of themselves; they fear
the alienation of not being able to communicate and thereby get close to
other human being. Perhaps worst of all, they fear a loss of identity.

This tendency is commonly found among Chinese students who are, on

average, more inclined to adopt a face-saving option. In Chinese culture, loss
of face puts ‘ego outside the society of decent human beings and security’
(Hu, 1944: 61) and loss of face constitutes a ‘real dread affecting the nervous
system ego more strongly than the physical fear’ (Hu, 1944: 50). Chinese stu-
dents, ‘in their understanding of themselves, build sets of defences to protect
the ego’ (Brown, 1987: 103). Their submission to authority – teachers and
grammar – can be taken as an alternative to protect face. In venturing an
utterance, if they blundered in a second language, some students would argue,
‘that’s what the teacher says’, or ‘there’s a similar sentence in my grammar
book/in my dictionary’. In that case, they would minimise the risk of losing
face. Hesitant and quiet in communication settings, Chinese students are gen-
erally considered low risk-takers and cautious monitor over users, who in
Krashen’s (1982) sense, over-emphasise self-correction. They are more con-
cerned with correctness and less likely to seek out conversations for fear of
being wrong or being ridiculed. However, individual variations still exist. Stu-
dents with such personality traits as extraversion, impulsiveness, socialisation
and exibility are more risk-taking, although the basic claim for face remains
unchanged. Even the same person may show variations from situation to situ-
ation. More risk-taking may characterise situations where more self-conŽ-
dence is felt. Because of the cultural tendency to save face, the relation between
30 Language, Culture and Curriculum

desire to communicate and WTC is moderated by the extent to which parti-

cular students will accept the risk of losing face.
Tolerance of ambiguity
A second language learning situation can be considered as ambiguous
(Chapelle & Roberts, 1986), as it shares some of the characteristics of the
ambiguous situations deŽned by Burdner (1962) and Norton (1975), which are
novelty, complexity, insolubility and unstructuredness. Chapelle and Roberts
(1986: 31) noted:
An L2 situation is considered ‘novel’ by learners because the grammati-
cal, lexical, phonological and cultural cues are unfamiliar and therefore
insufŽcient for them to construct a meaningful interpretation. On the
other hand, these cues may be perceived as being too numerous to inter-
pret, resulting in a ‘complex’ situation. Similarly, a learner may interpret
these multiple language cues as contradicting each other, rendering the
situation ‘insoluble’. Also, the situation can be perceived as ‘unstruc-
tured’.
In the presence of such ambiguous learning situations, learners’ attitudes
differ and their behaviours vary. Some perceive them as desirable (Burdner,
1962). ‘They are more content than others to entertain and even internalise
contradictory propositions’ (Brown, 1987: 89), and they are believed to excel
in the performance of ambiguous tasks (MacDonald, 1970). Others perceive
them as sources of psychological discomfort or threat (Burdner, 1962). They
tend to reject elements which are contradictory or slightly incongruent with
their existing system (Brown, 1987) and even try to avoid ambiguous situ-
ations (Chapelle & Roberts, 1986) or give up quickly when faced with ambigu-
ous tasks (Jonassen & Grabowsk, 1993). Yet, successful language learning
necessitates tolerance of ambiguity (Brown, 1987). Research by Naiman et al.,
(1975) has shown that students who were more tolerant of ambiguity perfor-
med better on both receptive and productive language tests. Chapelle and
Roberts (1986) found that tolerance of ambiguity was a predictor of certain
language tasks for ESL students in the United States. Reiss (1985), after meas-
uring tolerance of ambiguity with three situation-speciŽc items, found a posi-
tive relationship between tolerance of ambiguity and university foreign langu-
age students’ ratings of themselves as language learners.
Considering the characteristics of ambiguous situations, it is not surprising
to Žnd that Chinese students are, in general, less tolerant of ambiguity. This
tendency results from their rule-dominated and face-protection orientation.
To Chinese students, any vague, incomplete, fragmented or uncertain element
in language must Žt into an acceptable place in grammar. They feel emotion-
ally comfortable and secure only when they have worked out the meaning
of every new word they have encountered and made clear rules that seem
inconsistent. Guessing is not valued as a good learning strategy in Chinese
culture. Confucius’ saying ‘Say yes when you know; say no when you don’t.
Both cases indicate your knowledge’ still ‘remains a basic concept governing
the attitude and behaviour of students’ (Yu, 1984: 37). It is considered shame-
ful to assume what one does not know as being known. And shame indicates
the loss of face. Foreign teachers are often perplexed by Chinese students’
A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL 31

endless questions about reasons, such as ‘What’s the difference between this
and that?’ and ‘Why is this or that used here?’ It is true that Chinese students
will not engage in a discourse before they are perfectly sure of the related
cues. Commenting on uncertain cues, talking when one is unsure of the topic
would be considered as nonsense, which to the Chinese is indicative of shame.
While Chinese students are generally less tolerant of ambiguity, there are,
again, individual variations. Students with extroverted, outgoing, Želd-inde-
pendent personality traits are, on the whole, more tolerant of ambiguity. Also,
when students are conŽdent in themselves at a particular moment or in a
particular situation, or when they focus more on the meaning than on the
form, they are more tolerant of ambiguity, and thus, more actively engaged
in communication with less anxiety.

Motivational orientation
The decision to engage in a discourse is a motivated action. Of the interper-
sonal and intergroup motivational orientations, ‘control’ and ‘afŽliation’ are
the basic components in MacIntyre et al.’s (1998) model, which emphasises the
power relationship between the interlocutors and the desire to establish or
maintain rapport. In Chinese classroom-related communication settings, how-
ever, afŽliation and task-orientedness appear to explain more students’ motiv-
ational tendency – to Žt in a group and accomplish tasks so as to gain approval
of the immediate public and, thus, feel emotionally secure.
AfŽliation
Schachter (1967) argues that people simply seem to want to be in the physi-
cal presence of others. They seem to Žnd satisfaction in being ‘submerged’ in
the group. It is clear that the need for afŽliation is a universal tendency. Per-
sonal characteristics of the interlocutor such as attractiveness (Dion et al.,
1972), similarity (Byrne, 1971) and physical proximity (Newcomb, 1961) may
cause afŽliation motives to emerge. However, in our conceptualisation, afŽli-
ation carries cultural implications. As was stated, Chinese culture is basically
dominated by collectivism with the focus on interdependence and on
‘ingroups and Žtting in as sources of collective self-esteem’ (Gudykunst, 1995:
46). The self-concept is more embedded in interpersonal relationship and
group membership. Students raised in this collective culture, nurture a ‘senti-
mental desire for the warm feeling of ittaikan (feeling of oneness) with fellow
members of one’s group’ (Lebra, 1976: 25). They feel comfortable only when
close to other ingroup members. Separation from them leads to discomfort or
even pain (Triandis, 1988). This feeling of togetherness drives them to seek
the company of and establish a relationship with ingroup members. Although,
as Murray (1938) pointed out, a ‘need for afŽliation’ varies from person to
person, most Chinese students would prefer the company of others to soli-
tude. This tendency has a powerful inuence on classroom interactions and
can be taken as a prelude to interpersonal communication.
Task orientation
Second language acquisition research suggests that individuals acquire a
foreign language through meaningful communication in the target language,
that is, through the process of ‘interacting, negotiating and conveying mean-
32 Language, Culture and Curriculum

ings in the language in purposeful situations’ (Williams & Burden, 1997: 168).
In this light, a task can be regarded as a forum within which meaningful
interaction between participants can take place. It is through the ensuing
exchange and negotiation of meaning that learners’ knowledge of a language
system develops (Williams & Burden, 1997).
In the literature, a distinction is made between ego-involvement and task-
involvement. With ego-involvement, students are oriented to ‘developing new
skills, trying to understand their work, improving their level of competence,
or achieving a sense of mastery based on self-referenced standards’ (Ames,
1992: 262). With task-involvement, individuals focus on their ability and sense
of self-worth (Dweck, 1986; Nicholls, 1984), and on public recognition
(Covington & Beery, 1976; Meece et al., 1988). Taking into account Chinese
cultural values, task-involvement tendency would be more common among
Chinese students. Sensitive to social judgement, they would go out of their
way to avoid disapproval, which entails looking good or smart in the presence
of others. If they fail to accomplish their task in meaningful communication
in the target language, they risk losing face. This motivational orientation
might act to enhance subsequent involvement in the task. ‘When students are
focused on the task… they are likely to feel “empowered” in their pursuits,
to exhibit active engagement’ (Ames, 1992: 264).
Affective perceptions
The affective and cognitive context is in the Žfth layer, near the bottom of
MacIntyre et al.’s (1998) pyramid model, meaning that in their view it has less
direct impact on speciŽc language learning and communication contexts. In
our view, however, affective–cognitive perceptions are more directly involved
in determining the students’ WTC at a given time. This is because in a culture
in which too much attention is focused on public verdicts and social accept-
ance, language learners are always watchful and defensive concerning com-
munication in a new language. In this case, anxiety is a crucial issue related
to communication behaviours. The components most closely linked to anxiety
in Chinese culture are an inhibited monitor and an expectation of positive
evaluation.
Inhibited monitor
The term monitor comes from Krashen’s Monitor Model (1982). The concept
of monitoring captures the often observed tendency of learners to self-correct
their production based on their conscious application of rules they have
learned. According to Krashen (1982), there are three types of monitor users:
monitor over-users (to the extent that communication is impaired), monitor
under-users and the optimal monitor users. In classroom settings where the
emphasis is on formal learning, learners tend to be monitor over-users, which
is true of most Chinese classrooms where there is a great respect for and
submission to books, order and rules. The over concern with structure makes
it customary for students to seek Žnal answers from grammar to every
phenomenon in language. They approach English with a defensive mind. On
the other hand, driven by their face-protection orientation, students are mind-
ful of structure and correct forms, so that they will not make errors and will
thus avoid social embarrassment. However, there are times when students are
A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL 33

sure of themselves, when they perceive they are proŽcient in using the langu-
age. Perceived L2 proŽciency contributes to linguistic self-conŽdence (Clément
et al., 1977, 1980). As a second language variable, self-conŽdence in using the
second language has been shown to be linked to lower levels of stress
(Chataway & Berry, 1989) and higher levels of satisfaction with the self (Dion
et al., 1990; Krause et al., 1989). When students feel they are competent in using
the language, they will be much less defensive. This state corresponds to an
inhibited monitor. Students with an inhibited monitor are more communi-
cation-oriented and less concerned with error detection and correction, leaving
all the rules temporally behind. Students with an inhibited monitor have the
conscious knowledge of the language, but they do not use that knowledge to
edit at a particular time or on a particular occasion, although at other times
they may be rule-directed and form-oriented. An inhibited monitor entails
reduced self-consciousness and, therefore, reduced anxiety.

Expectation of a positive evaluation

Expectation and anticipation of evaluation or judgement (positive or
negative) along with the interplay of knowledge, belief/attitudes and self-
conception, is an important tendency in interpersonal communication settings.
Underlying this tendency is actually the claim for face. Lim (1994: 210) con-
tends that ‘face is not what one thinks of oneself, but what one thinks others
should think of one’s worth’. To put it simply, one cannot claim face unilat-
erally without regard to the other’s perspective. One’s self-esteem is built up
on the basis of others’ remarks. If one gets positive remarks, one’s self-esteem
is increased and, consequently, one has face (Yu & Gu, 1990). Chinese stu-
dents’ over concern with external judgements and verdicts of the signiŽcant
others Žnds its origin in this social orientation. Expectation of evaluation
would arise when they are placed in the communication setting, especially
when they enter into discourse with the signiŽcant others using the L2. Yu
(1990) remarks that the concern for what the signiŽcant others would say usu-
ally places unbearable pressure on the Chinese. The fear of being ridiculed
by others has a controlling effect on Chinese behaviour.
Stephan and Stephan (1985) have studied the relationship between expec-
tation and anxiety in intergroup contact, and found that positive expectations
arise out of ‘favourable’ conditions while negative expectations arise out of
‘unfavourable’ conditions. Positive expectations result in reduced anxiety
experienced in the intergroup contact situations. Gudykunst (1993) found that
an increase in positive expectations would produce a decrease in anxiety and
an increase in the ability to reduce predictive uncertainty. Expectation of a
positive evaluation creates a feeling of social acceptance and reward attain-
ment, so that students have a higher sense of self-efŽcacy and strong engage-
ment accompanied by reduced anxiety.
In summary, the variables explored here are proposed to moderate the
relation between DC and WTC. Together, they contribute to a positive com-
munication environment (Forman, 1998; Wen, 1992, 2001; Wen & Zhu, 1998)
which tears down students’ personal emotional barriers and enhances their
engagement in connecting with others. A positive communication environ-
ment is characterised by comfort, courage, conŽdence and co-operation
34 Language, Culture and Curriculum

(Forman, 1998). In a positive communication environment, students feel secure

taking risks, initiating speech and working harmoniously with their peers in
a group.

Conclusion and Empirical Implications

A culture-speciŽc interpretation of the WTC construct provides an enriched
concept, which may help lead to improved ELT. Examining WTC within a
Chinese cultural context, we have drawn from research Žndings of intercul-
tural communication, social psychology, humanistic pedagogy and second
language acquisition, and integrated them so that WTC is viewed as an inter-
play of communicative, linguistic and social-psychological factors rather than
as a simple display of linguistic competence or communicative competence.
Furthermore, our analysis illustrates the necessity to both broaden the array
of variables included in our conceptualization of WTC to accommodate cul-
turally speciŽc tendencies and to alter the functional relations between
elements of the model for the same reasons. Although MacIntyre et al.’s (1998)
model made no claim to strong structural relations between the concepts they
proposed, our analysis of communication in the Chinese classroom suggests
speciŽc areas of impact of concepts on WTC which are presented as concep-
tually distant in the original model.
However, the model presented in the paper is only a theoretical framework.
Empirical research is needed to conŽrm or disconŽrm the proposed variables
and their impact on WTC. Empirical studies might be centred around the
following two aspects.
First, we have revised MacIntyre et al.’s model from the perspective of Chi-
nese philosophy and culture. The revised model entails empirical veriŽcation.
Do any of the proposed changes counter claims by MacIntyre et al. or rather
do they elaborate the model in ways that Žt and Žll in the original claims?
Second, the concurrent functions of the proposed model are open to empiri-
cal testing. Studies should be carried out to examine how the various variables
of interest operate in Chinese classrooms.
With English gaining ever more popularity in China and elsewhere, and
with increasing demands for improved oral proŽciency, we hope that our
speciŽc proposal as well as our general approach will be further tested, con-
Žrmed and implemented.

Acknowledgements
This study was supported by grants from the China Scholarship Council
awarded to the Žrst author. We would like to thank Peter MacIntyre for his
insightful comments and suggestions on an earlier draft and Mari Wesche,
Robert Stelmack and Susan Baker for their detailed reading and helpful
suggestions on the Žnal paper.

Correspondence
Any correspondence should be directed to Wen Weiping at the College of
Foreign Languages, Xiangtan University, Hunan, 411105, People’s Republic of
China (lw@.[Link]) or to Richard Clément at the School of Psychology,
A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL 35

University of Ottawa, 125 University, Room 415A, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada,

K1N 6N5 (rclement@[Link]).

References
Ames, C. (1992) Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Edu-
cational Psychology 84, 261–271.
Andersen, J.F. (1979) Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teaching effectiveness. In D.
Nimmo (ed.) Communication Yearbook 3 (pp. 543–559). New Brunswick, NJ: Trans-
action Books.
Andersen, J.F., Andersen, P.A. and Jensen, A.D. (1979) The measurement of nonverbal
immediacy. Journal of Applied Communication Research 7, 153–180.
Barker, L.L., Wahlers, K.J., Matson, K.W., and Kibler, R.J. (1991) Group in Process: An
Introduction to Small Group Communication (4th edn). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pren-
tice-Hall.
Beebe, L.M. (1983) Risk-taking and the language learner. In H.W. Seliger and M.H.
Long (eds) Classroom-Oriented Research in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 39–66).
Rowley: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.
Brown, H.D. (1987) Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (2nd edn). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Bryson, B. (1990) The Mother Tongue: English and How It Got that Way. New York: Wil-
liam Morrow and Company, Inc.
Burdner, S. (1962) Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Person-
ality 30, 29–50.
Burgoon, J.K. (1976) The unwillingness-to-communicate scales: Development and vali-
dation. Communication Monographs 43, 60–69.
Byrne, D. (1971) The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
Carr, W. (1973) Interpersonal behaviour patterns in Asia. Lecture to Japan and East
Asia Area Studies Course, Foreign Service Institute, Washington DC.
Chai, C. and Chai, W. (1965) The Sacred Books of Confucius and other Confucian Classics.
New York: Bantam Books, Inc.
Chapelle, C. and Roberts, C. (1986) Ambiguity tolerance and Želd independence as
predictors of proŽciency in English as a second language. Language Learning 36,
27–45.
Chataway, C.J. and Berry J.W. (1989) Acculturation experiences, appraisal, coping and
adaptation: A comparison of Hongkong Chinese, French, and English students in
Canada. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 21, 295–309.
Cheng, M.S. (1997, April–May) Striving for higher goals in ELT in China. IATEFL News-
letter 16–17.
Christophel, D.M. (1990) The relationship among teacher immediacy behaviours, stud-
ent motivation, and learning. Communication Education 39, 323–340.
Chu, G.C. (1979) Communication and cultural change in China: A conceptual frame-
work. In G.C. Chu and F.L.K. Hsu (eds) Moving a Mountain (pp. 2–24). Honolulu:
East–West Center.
Clément, R., Gardner, R.C. and Smythe, P.C. (1977) Motivational variables in second
language acquisition: A study of Francophones learning English. Canadian Journal
of Behavioural Science 9, 123–133.
Clément, R., Gardner, R.C., and Smythe, P.C. (1980) Social and individual factors in
second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 12, 293–302.
Connell, J.P., and Wellborn, J.G. (1991) Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A
motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M.R. Gunnar and L.A. Sroufe (eds)
Self Processes and Development: Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology, 23 (pp. 43–
77). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Covington, M.V. and Beery, R.G. (1976) Self Worth and School Learning. NY: Holt, Rine-
hart and Winston.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. and McCormack, J. (1986) The inuence of teachers. Phi Delta
Kappan 67, 415–419.
36 Language, Culture and Curriculum

Dion, K.K., Berscheid, E. and Walster, E. (1972) What is beautiful is good. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285–290.
Dion, K.K., Dion, K.L. and Pak, A.W. (1990) The role of self-reported language pro-
Žciency in the cultural and psychological adaptation among members of Toronto,
Canada’s Chinese community. Journal of Asian PaciŽc Communication 1, 173–189.
Dweck, C.S. (1986) Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist 41,
1040–1048.
Ely, C.M. (1986) An analysis of discomfort, risk-taking, sociability, and motivation in
the L2 classroom. Language Learning 36, 1–25.
Festinger, L. (1950) Informal social communication. Psychological Review 57, 271–282.
Forman, R.L. (1998) Communication is Connection: 10 Steps to Create Your Own Positive
Communication Environment. Woodland Hills: Communication Enhancement Press.
Frymier, A.B. (1993) The impact of teacher immediacy on students’ motivation: Is it
the same for all students? Communication Quarterly 41, 454–464.
Frymier, A.B. (1994) A model of immediacy in the classroom. Communication Quarterly
42, 133–144.
Gao, G. (1998) ‘Don’t take my word for it.’ – Understanding Chinese speaking prac-
tices. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 22, 163–186.
Giles, H., Bourhis, R.Y. and Taylor, D.M. (1977) Toward a theory of language in ethnic
group relations. In H. Giles (ed.) Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations (pp. 307-
348). London, UK: Academic Press.
Gudykunst, W.B. (1993) Toward a theory of effective interpersonal and intergroup
communication: An anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) perspective. In R.L.
Wiseman and J. Koester (eds) Intercultural Communication Competence (pp. 33–71).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Gudykunst, W.B. (1995) Anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory: Current
status. In R.L. Wiseman (ed.) Intercultural Communication Theory (pp. 8–58). New-
bury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Gudykunst, W.B. (1998) Individualistic and collectivistic perspectives on communi-
cation: An introduction. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 22, 107–134.
Hinenoya, K. and Gatbonton, E. (2000) Ethnocentrism, cultural traits, beliefs, and
English proŽciency: A Japanese sample. The Modern Language Journal 84, 225–240.
Hogg, M.A. (1992) The School Psychology of Group Cohesiveness. New York: New York
University Press.
Hu, G. (2002) Potential cultural resistance to pedagogical imports: The case of com-
municative language teaching in the PRC. Language, Culture and Curriculum 15 (1),
30–49.
Hu, H.C. (1944) The Chinese concepts of ‘face’. American Anthropologist 46, 45–64.
Jonassen, D.H. and Grabowski, B.L. (1993) Handbook of Individual Differences, Learning,
and Instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Kessing, R. (1974) Theory of culture. Annual Review of Anthropology 3, 73–97.
King, A.Y. and Bond, M.H. (1985) The Confucian paradigm of man: A sociological
view. In W.S. Tseng and D.H. Wu (eds) Chinese Culture and Mental Health (pp. 29–
45). Orlando, FL: Academic Press, Inc.
Krashen, S. (1982) Principles and Practices of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Perga-
mon Press.
Krause, N., Bennet, J. and Tran, T.V. (1989) Age differences in the acculturation process.
Psychology and Aging 4, 321–332.
Lebra, T.S. (1976) Japanese Patterns of Behaviour. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Leng, H. (1997) New bottles, old wine: Communicative language teaching in China.
English Teaching Forum 35, 38–41.
Lim, T.S. (1994) Facework and interpersonal relationships. In S. Ting-Toomey (ed.)
Cross-Cultural and Interpersonal Issues (pp. 209–230). Albany: State University of
New York.
MacDonald, A.P. (1970) Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability and validity.
Psychological Reports 25, 791–798.
MacIntyre, P., Clément, R., Dornyer, Z. and Noels, K.A. (1998) Conceptualizing willing-
A Chinese Conceptualisation of Willingness to Communicate in ESL 37

ness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 conŽdence and afŽliation.

The Modern Language Journal 82, 245–262.
McCroskey, J.C. and Baer, J.E. (1985, November) Willingness to communicate: The con-
struct and its measurement. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech
Communication Association, Denver.
McCroskey, J.C. and Richmond, V.P. (1986) Willingness to communicate. In J.C.
McCroskey and J.A. Daly (eds) Personality and Interpersonal Communication (pp. 129–
156). Newbury Park, CA : Sage Publications, Inc.
Meece, J.L., Blumenfeld, P.C. and Hoyle, R.H. (1988) Students’ goal orientations and
cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology 80,
514–523.
Mehrabian, A. (1969) Some referents and measurements of nonverbal behaviour. Behav-
ioural Research Methods and Instruments 1, 203–217.
Mehrabian, A. (1971) Silent Message. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Murray, H.A. (1938) Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford University Press.
Naiman, N., Frohlich, M. and Stern, H.H. (1975) The Good Language Learner. Toronto:
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Newcomb, T.M. (1961) The Acquaintance Process. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Win-
ston.
Nicholls, J.G. (1984) Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experi-
ence, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review 91, 328–346.
Nixon, H.L. II. (1979) The Small Group. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Norton, R.W. (1975) Measurement of ambiguity tolerance. Journal of Personality Assess-
ment 39, 607–619.
Pratt, D.D. (1992) Chinese conceptions of learning and teaching: A Westerner’s attempt
at understanding. International Journal of Lifelong Education 11, 301–319.
Reeve, J. (1996) Motivating Others: Nurturing Inner Motivational Resources. New York:
Allyn and Bacon.
Reiss, M.A. (1985) The good language learner: Another look. The Canadian Modern Lang-
uage Review 41, 511–523.
Richmond, V.P. (1990) Communication in the classroom: Power and motivation. Com-
munication Education 39, 181–195.
Rodriguez, J.I., Plax, T.G. and Kearney, P. (1996) Clarifying the relationship between
teacher nonverbal immediacy and student cognitive learning: Affective learning as
the central causal mediator. Communication Education 45, 293–305.
Rubin, J. (1975) What the ‘good language learner’ can teach us. TESOL Quarterly 9,
41–51.
Saklofske, D.H. and Zeidner, M. (eds) (1995) International Handbook of Personality and
Intelligence. New York: Plenum Press.
Schachter, S. (1976) The Psychology of AfŽliation: Experimental Studies of the Sources of
Gregariousness. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Schumann, J. (1978) The acculturation model for second language acquisition. In R.
Gingras (ed.) Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching (pp. 27–50).
Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Scovel, J. (1983) English teaching in China: A historical perspective. Language Learning
and Communication 2, 105–109.
Shaw, M.E. (1981) Group Dynamics: The Psychology of Group Behaviour (3rd edn). New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Shu, X.C. (1961) Zhong guo xian dai jiao yu shi [History of Modern Education in China].
Beijing: People’s Education Press.
Skinner, E.A. and Belmont, M.J. (1993) Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects
of teacher behaviour and students engagement across the school year. Journal of
Educational Psychology 85, 571–581.
Stephan, W.G. and Stephan, C. (1985) Intergroup anxiety. Journal of Social Issues 41,
157–266.
Ting, Y.R. (1987) Foreign language teaching in China: Problems and perspectives. Can-
adian and International Education 16, 48–61.
 38 Language, Culture and Curriculum

Triandis, H.C. (1988) Collectivism vs. individualism: A reconceptualisation of a basic

concept in cross-cultural psychology. In G.K. Verma and C. Bayley (eds) Personality,
Attitudes and Cognitions (pp. 60–95). London: Macmillan.
Trimpop, R.M. (1994) The Psychology of Risk-taking Behaviour. North-Holland: Elsevier
Science B.V.
Tziner, A. (1982) Differential effects of group cohesiveness types: A clarifying over-
view. Social Behaviour and Personality 10, 227–239.
Wang, Y.Q. (1999) College English in China. English Today 57, 45–51.
Wen, W.P. (1992) Chuang zao you li yu yu yan xue xi de qing gan huan jing [Creating
a positive affective environment for language learning ]. Da Xue Wai Yu Jiao Xue
Yu Yan Jiu 2, 51–56.
Wen, W.P. (1999) Zhong guo xue sheng bei ping jia yi shi [On Chinese students’ expec-
tation of evaluation]. Xiangtan Da Xue Xue Bao 23, 116–118.
Wen, W.P. (2001) Qing gan dong li qi dong mo shi [Positive affect as dynamics in
second language learning]. Xiangtan Da Xue Xue Bao 25, 139–142.
Wen, W.P. and Zhu, Y.M. (1998) Wai yu xue xi qing gan zhang ai yan jiu [Studies on the
Affective Problems in Second Language Learning]. Xi’an: Northwest University Press.
Wierzbicka, A. (1996) Contrastive sociolinguistics and the theory of ‘cultural scripts’:
Chinese vs. English. In M. Hellinger and U. Ammon (eds) Contrastive Sociolinguistics
(pp. 107–131). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Williams, M. and Burden, R.L. (1997) Psychology for Language Teachers: A Social Construc-
tive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yang, K.S. (1981) Social orientation and individual modernity among Chinese students
in Taiwan. Journal of Social Psychology 113, 159–170.
Yu, C.C. (1984) Cultural principles underlying English teaching in China. Language
Learning and Communication 3, 29–39.
Yu, D.H. (1990) The hidden stories of the Chinese. Chinese Psychology Series 3 (pp. 1–
14). Taipei: Professor Zhang Press, Inc.
Yu, D.H., and Gu, B.L. (1990) Chinese face concerns. Chinese Psychology Series 3 (pp. 63–
107). Taipei: Professor Zhang Press, Inc.

View publication stats