BIROn - Birkbeck Institutional Research Online

Li, Chengchen and Dewaele, Jean-Marc and Pawlak, M. and Kruk, M.

(2022) Classroom environment and willingness to communicate in English:
the mediating role of emotions experienced by university students in China.
Language Teaching Research , ISSN 1362-1688.

Downloaded from: [Link]

Usage Guidelines:
Please refer to usage guidelines at [Link] or alternatively
contact lib-eprints@[Link].
Classroom environment and willingness to communicate in
English: The mediating role of emotions experienced by
university students in China1

Chengchen Li
Huazhong University of Science and Technology, China

Jean-Marc Dewaele
Birkbeck, University of London, UK

Mirosław Pawlak
Adam Mickiewicz University, Kalisz, Poland; University of Applied Sciences, Konin,
Poland

Mariusz Kruk
University of Zielona Góra, Poland

Abstract
The present study examines the direct and indirect relationships between classroom
environment (CE), L2 (second/foreign language) learner emotions (i.e. enjoyment,
anxiety and boredom), and their willingness to communicate (WTC) in classes for
English as a foreign language (EFL). Participants were 2,268 university students in
China. Pearson correlation analyses showed significant correlations between CE, L2
emotions, and WTC, with effect sizes ranging from small to large. In addition, the
three L2 emotions were found to mediate the relationship between CE and WTC in
parallel, with enjoyment having the largest mediating effect, followed by anxiety and
boredom. The findings offer insights into how to improve students’ WTC in an L2.

Keywords: anxiety, boredom, classroom environment, foreign language enjoyment,

willingness to communicate

Introduction

It is the nightmare of every foreign language (FL) teacher: a meticulously

prepared lesson, including various tasks and topics that are part of the curriculum,
delivered with enthusiasm, meets a wall of silence and apparent indifference on the

1
Pre-print of Li, C., Dewaele, J.-M., Pawlak, M. & Kruk, M. (2022). Classroom environment and
willingness to communicate in English: The mediating role of emotions experienced by university
students in China. Language Teaching Research [Link]
part of students. The teacher might feel like a pilot of a jetliner attempting to take off,
with full throttle, the engines straining, seeing the twinkling red lights marking the
end of the runway approaching rapidly, and worrying that the speed is still below the
250 kilometres per hour needed to clear the runway. This metaphor only goes so far.
The teacher may feel a rising sense of panic that things are not going according to
plan, but in contrast with the pilot, nobody risks dying for remaining earthbound. The
teacher has tricks up his or her sleeve that can boost the classroom atmosphere and lift
the class to a state of flow2 (Dewaele & MacIntyre, 2021). Rather than becoming
increasingly desperate about the lack of response and crashing in the hedge of trees at
the end of the runway, the teacher can abruptly decide to take a different route,
switching tasks, using humour, telling an interesting anecdote, enquiring about the
students’ recent extra-curricular activities, their views on sports victories and defeats
of the local team, their plans for future holidays. In other words, quick-thinking
teachers can turn the situation around. Just as the pilot uses a throttle and yoke to take
off, the teacher uses his/her tongue and heart to boost students’ enjoyment, to flush
out their boredom, control their anxiety and create a classroom environment where
everybody will want to participate.
Teachers and researchers know intuitively that how students feel in the
classroom contributes to the classroom environment (CE), which, in turn, affects
students’ emotions and, ultimately, their willingness to communicate (WTC). What is
not clearly known is to what extent students’ emotions actually mediate the
relationship between CE and WTC. This is the goal of the present quantitative study
on a large sample of Chinese English as a foreign language (EFL) learners.

Literature review

Willingness to communicate (WTC)

Although, initially, research into WTC concerned first language (L1) communication
(McCroskey & Baer, 1985; McCroskey & Richmond, 1987), it quickly became the
focus of attention of a growing number of SLA researchers. Soon it was found that an
individual’s willingness to engage in communication in the target language (TL) was
not “a simple manifestation of WTC in the L1” (MacIntyre, Clément, Dörnyei, &
Noels, 1998, p. 546). It was suggested that a range of individual and situational
variables had an impact on students’ readiness to start and/or engage in L2
communication (MacIntyre et al., 1998). For example, MacIntyre and Charos (1996)
showed that the rate of second language (L2) communication may be the outcome of
motivation and WTC, as well as perceived competence and language anxiety. L2
WTC was defined as the “readiness to enter into discourse at a particular time with a
specific person or persons, using an L2” (MacIntyre et al., 1998, p. 547) and it was
visualized in the form of a pyramid model which consists of six layers encompassing

2
Csíkszentmihályi (1990) described flow as follows: “Concentration is so intense that there is no
attention left over to think about anything irrelevant, or to worry about problems. Self-consciousness
disappears, and the sense of time becomes distorted. An activity that produces such experiences is so
gratifying that people are willing to do it for its own sake, with little concern for what they will get out
of it, even when it is difficult, or dangerous” (p. 71).
a set of linguistic, psychological and social factors. This model indicates that “L2
WTC is a composite variable influenced by the joint effect of variables both internal
and external to individual learners” (Peng & Woodrow, 2010, p. 835).
Numerous empirical investigations have been carried out to explore variables
included in the model created by MacIntyre et al. (1998) and other variables affecting
WTC in various language learning contexts (e.g., self-perceived communicative
competence, personality, age, sex, attitudes, learning environments). For example,
studies conducted by Yashima (2002), Peng (2007), Khajavy et al. (2016), or
Piechurska-Kuciel (2011) uncovered a relationship between self-perceived
communicative competence and L2 WTC, revealing that language learners’ positive
perception of their L2 competence translates into heightened L2 WTC. The studies
conducted, for example, by Liu and Park (2012) and Wu and Lin (2014) showed a
link between motivation and WTC, indicating that more motivated language learners
tended to be more willing to communicate in L2. MacIntyre and Charos (1996)
showed that extraverted individuals more frequently communicated in the TL and
those learners who were more pleasant and agreeable tended to have more satisfying
encounters with TL speakers. Yashima (2002) observed that learners with higher
international posture appeared to be both more motivated to study English, more
willing to communicate in the language and their higher WTC generated more
frequent communication in the TL. Donovan and MacIntyre (2005) investigated age
and sex differences in WTC, communication apprehension and self-perceived
communication competence among students from different types of school (i.e.,
junior high, high and university). Among other things, the obtained results revealed
that junior high school males were less willing to communicate than females and male
students at the university level reported lower communication apprehension and
higher self-perceived competence than their female counterparts. Cao and Philp (2006)
as well as Mystkowska-Wiertelak and Pawlak (2017) showed that a number of
variables such as group size, familiarity with interlocutors and topics under discussion,
interlocutor involvement in the conversation, cultural background or classroom
atmosphere can have an influence on language learners WTC during L2 lessons. In
addition, language tasks, content and context as well as the use of new technologies
were reported as affecting language learners’ desire to communicate in the TL (e.g.,
Compton, 2007; Kruk, 2021a, 2021b; Weaver, 2007). More recently researchers have
started to focus on the role of positive as well as negative emotions in the classroom
environment. Since the role of these factors is the focus of the present study, they are
discussed in more detail in the following sections.
Classroom environment (CE)
CE is defined as “the atmosphere, ambience, tone, or climate that pervades the
particular educational setting” (Dorman et al., 2006). It has been recognized as a
significant predictor for learning success (Fraser, 1998, 1998; Jennings & Greenberg,
2009). It is central to the learning process, affecting the way the class is going and the
way students think, feel and behave in the class (Li, Huang, & Li, 2021). Fraser et al.
(1986) argued that a class with a positive CE is characterized by “student
cohesiveness, teacher support, self-involvement, investigation, task orientation,
cooperation and equity” (Li et al., 2021, p. 3). In a sample of 579 university students
in China studying English as their foreign language (FL), Peng and Woodrow (2010)
identified Teacher Support, Student Cohesiveness, and Task Orientation as three
dimensions of CE. Similarly, Harvey et al. (2012) argued that a class with a positive
CE features a friendly, caring, encouraging, and supportive teacher, cooperative and
cohesive students, mutual respect and congenial bonds between teachers and students,
interactive, and engaging tasks with competitiveness at a manageable level. This
suggests that the teacher, the learner and the task are three core constituent elements
of CE (Li et al., 2021).
Enjoyment and anxiety
The concept of Foreign Language Enjoyment (FLE) was explicitly introduced into
SLA research in Dewaele and MacIntyre (2014) to establish its relationship with
Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety (FLCA). They defined FLE by comparing it to
the more superficial and ephemeral concept of pleasure: FLE is “a complex emotion,
capturing interacting dimensions of challenge and perceived ability that reflect the
human drive for success in the face of difficult tasks (…) enjoyments occur when
people not only meet their needs, but exceed them to accomplish something new or
even unexpected; on the other hand, pleasure is a simpler feeling that something
likable is happening” (Dewaele & MacIntyre, 2016, pp. 216-217). They developed a
new FLE scale consisting of 21 items with 5-point Likert scales that probed the
personal and social dimensions of FLE and they added an 8-item FLCA scale
extracted from Horwitz et al.’s (1986) 33-item FLCAS which reflected physical
symptoms of anxiety, nervousness, and lack of confidence. Horwitz et al. (1986)
defined FLCA as “a distinct complex of self-perceptions, beliefs, feelings and
behaviours related to classroom learning arising from the uniqueness of the language
learning process” (p. 128). Dewaele and MacIntyre (2014) collected both quantitative
and qualitative data from 1,746 FL learners with very different language profiles
through an online questionnaire. It allowed them to establish that FLE and FLCA
were moderately negatively correlated. In other words, they are not like the two faces
of Janus but in fact represent fundamentally independent dimensions. Low levels of
FLCA do not guarantee high levels of FLE and vice versa. The authors found that
higher levels of FLE and lower levels of FLCA were linked to higher levels of
multilingualism, confidence in the FL, proficiency, older age, and being Western
rather than Asian. Female participants reported both more FLE and FLCA than male
participants but the effect size was small. Participants’ descriptions of episodes of
intense enjoyment in their FL class highlighted the social dimension of FLE, namely
good relations with peers and teachers through humour, praise and encouragement
combined with mutual trust and respect. Participants typically mentioned classroom
activities that gave them a degree of autonomy.
Dewaele and MacIntyre (2019) followed up their early study with a research
design that included participants’ personality traits as well as independent variables
linked to the teacher and qualitative data about both an enjoyable and an
anxiety-provoking episode in the FL class. Participants were 750 FL learners from
around the world who filled out an online questionnaire. The study focused on the
role of learner-internal variables like in the previous study but also learner-external
variables in FLE and FLCA. Teacher-related variables emerged as the strongest
predictors of FLE together with Cultural Empathy, while Neuroticism was the
strongest predictor of FLCA and teacher-related variables had no effect. The findings
of multiple regression analyses were confirmed by statistical analysis of the coded
qualitative data. Source(s) of FLE were significantly linked to the teacher while
sources of FLCA were more strongly linked to the self, confirming previous research
(Dewaele, Witney, Saito, & Dewaele 2018; Dewaele, Magdalena Franco, & Saito,
2019; Jiang & Dewaele, 2019; Li et al., 2018).
Boredom
Boredom is a prevalent emotion across school settings (Goetz & Hall, 2014).
Researchers found that students felt bored during 32% to 58% of the instruction time
at different educational levels (e.g., Larson & Richards, 1991; Nett et al., 2011;
Pekrun et al., 2010). In an L2 context in Chinese universities, Li et al. (2021) found
that 610 out of 659 (92.6%) participants reported experiencing boredom in relation to
learning English. Interestingly, despite the prevelance of boredom in educational
settings, relevant research in L2 settings is still in infancy (Li & Dewaele, 2020; Li,
2021; Pawlak et al. 2020a; Pawlak et al., 2020b). Some researchers adopted a
predominantly qualitatitive approach with relatively small sample sizes (e.g., Kruk,
2022; Zawodniak & Kruk, 2019; Pawlak et al., 2020a; Pawlak et al., 2020b; Pawlak et
al., 2020c; Pawlak et al., 2020d) and others adopted a quantatitive or mixed methods
approach (Dewaele & Li, 2020; Li, 2021; Li & Dewaele, 2020; Li et al., 2021; Li &
Wei, 2022).
Boredom is an unpleasant psychological state characterized by a sense of
emptiness, physical inactivity, lack of achievement goal, purpose and motivation
(Zawodniak et al., 2017). Li et al. (2021) decribed FL learning boredom as a negative
activity-related achievement emotion with a low arousal based on interview data
obtained from 22 students and 11 English teachers, and 659 students’ responses to
open-ended questions. Specifically, FL learning boredom is an unpleasant emotion
linked to negative feelings or sympotoms including “lack of interest, restlessness,
anxiety, frustration, helplessness, dislike, unpleasant state of passiveness, sadness,
impatience, depression, emptiness, guilt, tiredness, feeling of time dragging,
sleepiness and dissatisfaction” (Li et al., p. 12). Secondly, it arises from ongoing FL
learning tasks or activities which are perceived as under-challenging,
over-challenging, monotonous, dull or tedious, and meaningless (Li et al., 2021;
Pawlak et al., 2020). Lastly, it involves physical and cognitive inactivity, lack of goal
in learning, unwillingless to engage in the learning environment, disengagement or
withdrawal from tasks or activities at hand.
Associations between emotions and WTC
Emotion has long been regarded as one of the central determinants of CE (Harvey et
al., 2012). The established CE is closely linked to the emotional tone set for
classroom activities and relationships (Hamre & Pianta, 2007). Positive CE is
accompanied by positive feelings, including boosted interest, enjoyment, comfort, and
relaxation, as well as heightened motivation in learning and more voluntary
participation in the learning environment. In contrast, negative CE is characterized by
negative feelings including anxiety, nervousness, anger, boredom, discomfort,
confusion, and aggression, as well as inattention, disengagement, or academic
withdrawal (Dorman & Fraser, 2009; Hamre & Pianta, 2007; Harvey et al., 2012;
Reyes et al., 2012).
In the field of SLA, several researchers have started to examine the links
between CE and L2 emotions. Khajavy et al. (2018), for example, investigated
relationships between CE, enjoyment, and anxiety of 1,528 Iranian EFL learners at
secondary level. The results showed that positive CE was linked to higher levels of
student enjoyment and lower levels of anxiety. In other words, participants who
perceived the environment of their English classes as more positive tended to enjoy
more, feel less anxious and be more willing to communicate in English in class. In
another study, Xia and Xu (2018), based on questionnaire data obtained from 783
English majors in China, revealed that CE negatively predicted negative emotions (i.e.,
guilty, anxiety, frustration, boredom, and helplessness). More recently, Li et al. (2021)
revealed in two sub-studies (i.e., 1,718 senior high school students and 1,295 students
in China) that CE predicted enjoyment and anxiety positively and negatively,
respectively. The authors argued that positive feelings arise in positive psychosocial
CE, while negative feelings are evoked in response to negative, especially threatening,
risky, daunting or harsh learning environment, leading to learners’ withdrawal from
interactions in the classroom.
The role of language learners’ emotions in shaping WTC, and especially the role
of FLCA has been thoroughly investigated (e.g., Clément, Baker, & MacIntyre, 2003;
Compton, 2004; Hashimoto, 2002; MacIntyre, Baker, Clément, & Donovan, 2003;
Peng & Woodrow, 2010; Yashima, 2002). High FLCA and low levels of perceived
communicative competence were found to be strong negative predictors of WTC
whereas positive emotions constitute positive predictors. For example, the study
conducted by Khajavy, MacIntyre, and Barabadi (2018) demonstrated that in a
positive classroom environment, students experience less FLCA and more FLE, with
the effect that they are more eager to use the FL. Dewaele and Dewaele (2018)
compared the decision to speak up in the FL to a jump in the pool from a great height,
with anxiety about the impact and the risk of coming up without swimwear. The
authors found that among 189 British FL learners FLCA was a strong (negative)
predictor of WTC while FLE was a slightly weaker positive predictor. A similar
finding emerged in Dewaele (2019), where FLCA was the strongest negative predictor
of WTC among 210 Spanish EFL learners and where FLE and frequency of English
use by the teacher were weaker positive predictors.
The retrodictive multiple case study carried out by Dewaele and Pavelescu
(2021) showed that FLE and FLCA were linked to WTC in dynamic, idiosyncratic
ways which evolved from the first contact with the FL into the present use of the FL
both inside and outside of the classroom. Classroom observations and interviews
revealed that FLE, FLCA and WTC were not only interacting in complex ways and
were linked to learners’ personality but were also shaped by specific activities during
class, by seating arrangements in the room and by the behaviour of teacher and peers.
Finally, Kruk (2021b) sought to capture the associations between WTC, boredom and
language anxiety (along with motivation) in the virtual world Second Life. The results
suggested that these variables interacted dynamically and unpredictably. It was found,
for example, that although a higher/lower level of WTC (and motivation) translated
into a lower/higher level of experiencing boredom and language anxiety, these
relationships were not the norm and some deviations from this trend were also
observed.

What emerges from the literature review is that no classroom emotion exists in
a vacuum, various positive and negative emotions co-exist in an on-going complex
tug of war over different timescales. What is more, such positive and negative
emotions are closely related to different aspects of classroom environment, which
only adds to the complexity of such relationships. This complexity dictates that
researchers can at best perceive a small part of much bigger dynamic picture. The
high degree of interactions between emotional, psychological, linguistic and
behavioural variables also means that it is equally difficult to pinpoint causality as a
particular emotion may affect and be itself affected by other emotions and aspects of
CE. This emotion might simultaneously be at the basis of a particular behaviour
which may either reinforce, reshape or disrupt this emotion. The same
multi-directionality applies to WTC whose levels are bound to hinge on different
academic emotions and their combinations, different elements of classroom
environment, and complex interactions between these. While previous research has
shed some light on the role of some components of CE as well as some positive and
negative emotions in shaping L2 WTC, no study conducted to date has explored the
combined effect of these factors through mediation analysis. Such an investigation
may enhance our understanding of the effect pathways or nomological networks
involving these variables.

Research questions

In view of the above considerations, the present study was designed to address the
following two research questions:
RQ1: What are the relationships between classroom environment, three
classroom emotions (i.e., enjoyment, anxiety, and boredom), and willingness to
communicate?
RQ2: Do the three emotions co-mediate the relationship between classroom
environment and willingness to communicate?

Methodology

Participants
Convenience sampling was adopted in this study. The first author contacted her
colleagues at different universities in China and asked them to recruit their students as
participants of the current project. Fifty-eight English teachers from ten universities of
non-English majors agreed to aid and forwarded the online questionnaire to their
students during a class break. The universities included top-ranking ones as well as
those with relatively lower rankings. Online consent was obtained individually at the
very beginning of the questionnaire survey. The participants were informed of the
nature and purpose of the study, the anonymity, approximate completion time, their
right to refuse to participate as well as to withdraw from the questionnaire survey. A
total of 2,268 students completed the questionnaire survey. There were 1,424
freshmen (62.77%), 673 sophomores (29.67%), 12 juniors (0.53%), 8 seniors (0.36%),
and 151 individuals who failed to provide such information (6.67%). They came from
over 40 sub-disciplines of humanities, social sciences, and natural science. The
detailed background information is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Participants’ background information (N = 2,268)

 Mean
University Location in China No. Percent Male Female Other SD
Age
A Beijing (North) 57 2.5 5 52 / 18.82 1.86
B Zhuhai (South) 25 1.1 8 14 3 18.87 .88
C Beijing (North) 1 .0 / 1 / 21 /
D Chengde (North) 35 1.5 7 28 / 18.68 .87
E Longyan (South) 510 22.5 115 366 29 19.44 1.13
F Beijing (North) 28 1.2 21 6 1 18.77 .96
G Taiyuan (North) 210 9.3 47 155 8 18.89 .84
H Beijing (North) 23 1.0 4 18 1 19.35 .76
I Beijing (North) 503 22.2 158 325 20 18.13 .68
J Wuhan (Center) 876 38.6 222 602 52 18.70 .89
Tot. / 2268 100.0 587 1563 118 18.72 .95

Data-collection instrument
The variables under investigation were measured using a composite questionnaire. All
the items were in Chinese to allow for full understanding. A PhD student in applied
linguistics translated the scales, which were further checked by two scholars in
applied linguistics and educational psychology. Disagreement, comments, and
suggestions were all addressed by the first author. All the items were responded to on
a 7-point Likert scale ranging from “1 (completely disagree)” to “7 (completely
agree).” The questionnaire included scales tapping into the constructs investigated in
the present study, that is CE, FLE, FLCA, boredom, and WTC.
Classroom environment
The adapted version of What Is Happening In This Class (WIHIC) Questionnaire
(Peng & Woodrow, 2010) was used to measure CE. The adapted version consists of
13 items taken from the WIHIC (Fraser et al., 1986) and reformulated to fit the L2
context. They measure the following three factors: 1) Teacher Support, 2) Student
Cohesiveness, and 3) Task Orientation. The adapted version has been validated in a
sample of 579 EFL students in China at tertiary level, showing high reliability
(Cronbach’s alpha = .88). The reliability of the scale in the current sample is presented
in Table 2. In the current study, the short form also showed excellent
construct validity (x2(60) = 385.890; CFI = .971; TLI = .963; SRMR = .030; RMSEA
=.066) as well as reliability (see Table 2).
Foreign Language Enjoyment
The Chinese version of Foreign Language Enjoyment Scale (CFLES) (Li et al., 2018)
was adopted to assess the enjoyment participants experienced in relation to their
English learning. The CFLES is a modified version of the Foreign Language
Enjoyment Scale (Dewaele & MacIntyre, 2014). It consists of 11 items measuring
three sub-dimensions: FLE-Private, FLE-Teacher and FLE-Atmosphere. It has been
validated in a sample of 1,718 Chinese EFL students at secondary level, showing
satisfactory psychometric properties including reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = .83) and
construct validity (x2 (41) = 72.975; CFI = 0.975; TLI = 0.967; SRMR = 0.034;
RMSEA = 0.041) (Li et al., 2018). The CFLES has also been used with EFL learners
in China at tertiary level, showing equally high reliability (see e.g., Li et al., 2021;
Cronbach’s alpha = .87, N = 1,295). In the current study, the CFLES also showed
excel lent construct validity (x2 (41) = 633.157; CFI = .964; TLI = .952; SRMR
= .047; RMSEA = .041) as well as reliability (see Table 2).
Anxiety and boredom
Both anxiety and boredom of participants were measured using three items each,
taken from the Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (AEQ) (Pekrun et al., 2011). The
AEQ was originally developed in general educational psychology, showing readiness
to be applied and validated in other specific subjects. The six items were extracted
from the AEQ and reformulated to fit into the current EFL context. Example items for
anxiety and boredom are: a) “I feel panicky when writing an [English] exam;” b) “I
get bored in [English] classes.”
Willingness to communicate
Peng and Woodrow’s (2010) scale measuring WTC in English was adopted in the
present study. It consists of 10 items adapted from the scale of Weaver’s (2005).
Validated among a sample of 579 university students in China, the scale showed high
reliability (α = .88). In the current study, the shortened WTC scale showed acceptable
construct validity (x2 (29) = 544.763; CFI = .977; TLI = .965; SRMR = .046; RMSEA
= .089) as well as reliability (see Table 2).
Data analysis
Preliminary analyses involved computing descriptive analyses as well as running
normality tests. The results are presented in Table 2. In order to answer RQ1, Pearson
correlation analyses were conducted using SPSS 19.0. To address RQ2, we performed
a series of multiple regression analyses and mediation analyses using PROCESS
SPSS 19.0, following the steps described by Hayes (2013). Specifically, multiple
regressions involved the following four steps: 1) CE and student WTC were entered
as independent and dependent variables separately; 2-3) CE was entered as the
independent variable for the dependent variables of enjoyment, anxiety and boredom,
respectively; 4) CE, enjoyment, anxiety and boredom were all entered as
co-predictors for WTC. We then used PROCESS v2.16.3 (Model 4) to further
investigate the relationship of these variables collectively, calculate the mediating
effect, compare the specific mediating effects of enjoyment, anxiety, and boredom,
and obtain confidence intervals using bootstrap.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics (N = 2,268)

Possible
Variable Min. Max. M SD Skewness SE Kurtosis SE α
Range
CE 13-91 13 91 72.68 12.764 -.499 .051 -.081 .103 .930
FLE 11-77 11 77 55.17 11.016 -.250 .051 .234 .103 .879
anxiety 3-21 3 21 11.00 4.333 .151 .051 -.506 .103 .774
boredom 3-21 3 21 8.85 3.954 .523 .051 .154 .103 .800
WTC 10-70 10 70 46.16 14.318 -.152 .051 -.481 .103 .940

Results

Correlation analysis
As shown in Table 3, CE was found to be positively related to FLE and WTC, with a
medium-to-large effect size (r = .684, p＜.001) and small-to-medium effect size
respectively (r = .498, p＜.001), according to the benchmarks proposed by Plonsky
 and Oswald (2014). In contrast, CE was found to be negatively related to both anxiety
and boredom, with a small effect size (r = -.138, p＜.001) and a small-to-medium
effect size (r = -.369, p＜.001) respectively. In terms of the relationships between
emotions and WTC, FLE was found to be positively related to WTC, with a
medium-to-large effect size (r = .571, p＜.001). At the same time, both anxiety and
boredom were found to be negatively related to WTC, both with a small-to-medium
effect size (r = -.226, p＜.001; r = -.271, p＜.001, respectively). Finally, in terms of
the relationships between the three emotions, FLE was found to be negatively related
to anxiety and boredom, with a small-to-medium effect size (r = -.209, p＜.001; r =
-.424, p＜.001 respectively). Anxiety was found to be positively related to boredom (r
= .507, p＜.001).

Table 3. The relationships between CE, FLE, anxiety, boredom, and WTC
Variable 1 2 3 4 5
1. CE —
2. FLE .684*** —
3. Anxiety -.138*** -.209*** —
4. Boredom -.369*** -.424*** .507*** —
5. WTC .498*** .571*** -.226*** -.271*** —
Note: N = 2,268; *** p＜.001
The co-mediating effect of three emotions on the relationship between CE and WTC
The results of the multiple regressions are displayed in Table 4. The most striking
findings are the following: 1) students’ perceived CE predicted their WTC positively
and significantly (β = .498, p < .001); 2) students’ perceived CE predicted the three
emotions (FLE, anxiety and boredom) significantly (β1 =. 684, p < .001; β2 = -.138, p
< .001; β3 = -.369, p < .001); 3) in the presence of students’ perceived CE, FLE,
anxiety and boredom in the same model, the three emotions predicted participants’
WTC significantly (β1 =. 421, p < .001; β2 = -.136, p < .001; β3 = .054, p < .05), and
the predictive effect of perceived CE on their WTC remained significant (β = .211, p
< .001).
Table 4 Regression results for mediator model (N = 2,268)
95.0% Confidence Collinearity
Regression equations Fit index Coefficient
interval for B statistics
Lower Upper
Predictor Outcome R R2 F β Β t Tolerance VIF
bound bound
WTC .498 .248 747.248*** .498 .559 27.336*** .519 .599 1.000 1.000
FLE .684 .467 1988.192*** .684 .590 44.589*** .564 .616 1.000 1.000
CE Anxiety .138 .019 44.118*** -.138 -.047 -6.642*** -.061 -.033 1.000 1.000
-.126 -.102 1.000 1.000
Boredom .369 .136 356.951*** -.369 -.114 -18.893***

CE .211 .237 9.088*** .186 .288 .522 1.915

FLE .421 .548 17.703** .487 .608 .498 2.009
WTC .601 .362 320.696***
Anxiety -.136 -.449 -6.958** -.576 -.323 .739 1.353
Boredom .054 .197 2.558* .046 .348 .625 1.599
Note. B are Unstandardized Coefficients, β are standardized coefficients. Teacher
enthusiasm = students’ perceived teacher enthusiasm. * p＜.05; ** p＜.01; *** p
＜.001
According to above-mentioned conditions of mediation (Hayes, 2013), these
results indicate that the parallel multiple mediator model we proposed is an excellent
fit of the data (R2 = .362, F(4, 2268) = 320.696, p < .001): FLE, anxiety and boredom
collectively mediated the effect of students’ perceived CE on their WTC. In other
words, perceived CE influenced student WTC either directly or indirectly by
influencing three emotions first. The parallel mediator model is summarized as Figure
1.

Enjoyment

b1 = .421***
a1 =. 684***

c =. 498***

Classroom Environment Willingness to Communicate

c’= .208 ***

a2 =-.138 *** b2 = -.136***

Anxiety
a3 =-. 369*** b3 = .054*

Boredom

Figure 1. The statistical diagram of Parallel Multiple Mediation

Total mediating effect size and comparison between the mediating effects of
FLE, anxiety and boredom were provided in the PROCESS output and are presented
in Table 5. As can be seen from the data, the 95% confidence intervals do not straddle
zero, so we can conclude with 95% confidence that FLE, anxiety and boredom
mediated the effect of perceived CE on student WTC in parallel, and the total
mediating effect size was .29, taking up 57.59% of the total effect of perceived CE on
student WTC. The mediating effect of perceived CE on student WTC was exerted
through three mediators, namely, FLE, anxiety and boredom, with the effect sizes
being .29, .02 and -.02 respectively. The 95% confidence intervals indicated that all of
them reached a significant level. Besides, C1, C2, and C3 provided in the PROCESS
output indicated that the indirect effect through enjoyment was significantly stronger
than those through anxiety and boredom, taking up 57.84%, 3.77% and -4.02% of the
total mediating effect respectively.
Table 5 Analysis of the mediation model
Indirect effect Indirect/total
Pathway SE BCa 95% CI
size effect
Total indirect effect .29 .02 [.2469, .3243] 57.59%
CE → FLE → WTC .29 .02 [.2483, .3261] 57.84%
CE → anxiety → WTC .02 .01 [.0113, .0285] 3.77%

CE → boredom → WTC -.02 .01 [-.0373, -.0025] -4.02%

C1 (FLE – FLCA) [.2544, .3471]

.30 .02
C2 (FLE – boredom) .35 .03 [.2942, .3954]
C3 (FLCA – boredom) [.0191, .0689]
.04 .01
Note: All coefficients except C1, C2, C3 are completely standardized coefficients.

Discussion

Relationships between CE, FLE, anxiety, boredom, and WTC

Correlational analyses identified relationships among the variables under investigation.
In the first place, CE proved to be positively associated with both FLE and WTC,
with the effect size being medium-to-large in the former case and small-to-medium in
the latter. By contrast, the relationship with anxiety and boredom turned out to be
negative, and more variability was accounted for in the latter case. Such results hardly
come as a surprise as they corroborate the findings of previous research, both in the
field of educational psychology and L2 learning, which have shown that the support
coming from the teacher, cooperation between learners and the inclusion of engaging
tasks (cf. Peng & Woodrow, 2010) either emanate from or ensure positive emotions
while at the same time being hindered by or generating negative feelings that
inevitably accompany the L2 learning process (cf. Harvey et al. 2012; Khajavy et al.,
2018; Li et al., 2021; Reyes et al., 2012). The finding that students who were happy
with the CE reported higher levels of FLE and were also more willing to speak also
confirms previous research (Dewaele, 2019; Dewaele & Dewaele, 2018). It is worth
noting that the negative effect of anxiety is in fact superseded by that of boredom. It
would thus seem that the feelings of a sense of emptiness, frustration, lack of clearly
identifiable goals, dissatisfaction with classroom activities, or insufficient or
excessive challenge (Li et al, 2021; Pawlak et al, 2020; Zawodniak et al, 2017),
together with the somewhat inevitable decrease in engagement (Mercer & Dörnyei,
2020), are more likely to be accompanied by negative evaluations of different facets
of CE than the sheer experience of anxiety and its physical symptoms. In other words,
high levels of boredom are more likely to undermine the overall classroom climate
than anxiety. One reason could be that it might simply be easier to switch to tasks and
activities that are likely to reduce anxiety (e.g., a reading task, the comfort of
interacting with a regular desk mate), whereas combating boredom poses a much
greater challenge as it can be potentially triggered by any topic, task or even the
specific phase of the lesson. Obviously, the relationship is reciprocal because while
boredom (and anxiety) can have a negative impact on CE, a poor classroom
atmosphere can heighten the likelihood of simultaneous occurrence of these two
negative emotions.
When it comes to the relationship between the three emotions in question and
WTC, FLE proved to be positively related to WTC, with a medium-to-large effect
size, accounting for about 33% of the variance. Both anxiety and boredom were
negatively correlated to WTC, with the strength of the relationship being small-to
medium and quite similar in both cases, explaining about 5%-7% of the variance.
These findings partly corroborate the results of previous studies in that greater
enjoyment strengthens WTC whereas heightened anxiety weakens it (e.g., Khajavy et
al. 2018), However, in this case, in contrast to the results of Dewaele and Dewaele
(2018) as well as Dewaele (2019), it was FLE that emerged as the strongest positive
predictor of WTC, rather than the negative effects of anxiety. This only goes to show
the immense complexity of the relationships among the three constructs, which, as
shown by more situated studies (e.g., Dewaele & Pavelescu, 2021; Kruk, 2021b),
interact in intricate ways in response to various combinations of learner characteristics
as well as contextual factors. It also suggests that causality is multidirectional, with
CE, FLE, anxiety and boredom being connected in a complex feedback loop, where
all variables are influencing each other and being influenced by them in return as the
lesson progresses.
Finally, when we look at the relationships between the three academic emotions
as such, FLE was negatively related to both anxiety and boredom, while these two
were found to be positively correlated with each other, with small to medium effect
sizes in all cases. Three important caveats are in order at this point, though. First,
somewhat similar to what was observed for CE, boredom was a much stronger
negative predictor than FLCA, explaining more than four times as much variance in
enjoyment (ca. 18% vs. ca. 4%). This would suggest that boredom is much more
lethal than anxiety for WTC in the classroom. While teachers should try to do
everything in their power to lower overall anxiety levels, they should also make their
classes safe and exciting, so that even anxious learners are drawn into the interactions.
Further research is needed to find out whether highly anxious learners will engage in a
speaking activity if they find it interesting and enjoyable enough. Although boredom
may also be reflective of individual predispositions such as general boredom
proneness (cf. Pawlak, 2020), it is irrevocably connected with the nature of the
learning activities, the topics they cover and the ways in which they are performed.
Shaking off boredom requires the teacher to notice when learners’ eyelids are
drooping and introduce a new activity to energize the classroom and get every student
buzzing again. It also requires a more fundamental, long-term change in the design
and conduct of classes. Avoiding routine and introducing new, unexpected activities is
the equivalent of chasing out the dusty cobwebs by opening the windows and
allowing fresh air to enter the classroom. Second, it could be argued that enjoyment
and boredom are closer to being opposite ends of the same emotion dimension than
enjoyment and anxiety (Dewaele & MacIntyre, 2014, 2019). Indeed, enjoyment is
associated with engagement and boredom with disengagement. They are nonetheless
distinct academic emotions, not least because the former seems to be more amenable
to teacher intervention than the latter. Third, while anxiety and boredom share almost
26% of the variance, they are definitely distinct dimensions, mainly because the
former implies higher arousal than the latter and is much more strongly connected to
learner-internal factors (e.g., personality, e.g., Dewaele & McIntyre, 2019; Magdalena
Franco, & Saito, 2019; Jiang & Dewaele, 2019; Li et al., 2018). To put it differently,
both of these negative emotions are likely to negatively impact the performance of
classroom tasks, CE and WTC, which explain the overlap, but their roots are probably
different.
Co-mediation of FLE, anxiety and boredom in the relationship between CE and
WTC
The analysis revealed that although CE has a direct, positive and significant influence
on learners’ WTC, explaining about 25% of the variance, this impact was co-mediated
by the three academic emotions investigated in the presents study, that is, FLE,
anxiety and boredom. More specifically, regression analysis demonstrated that CE
significantly predicted the occurrence of these three emotions, with this influence
being positive and in fact the largest in the case of FLE, with about 47% of the
variance being explained. In contrast, it was negative for both anxiety and boredom,
but its predictive power was considerably stronger in the latter case (2% vs. 14% of
the variance being explained, respectively), which is largely consistent with the
results of correlational analysis. Once again, it seems that boredom is much more
closely connected with what is going on during the lesson in terms of what the teacher
does, how other learners behave, and what tasks are implemented and how, than
anxiety, thus also coming a little closer to representing the flip side of engagement
(Dewaele & MacIntyre, 2014, 2019). At the same time, when the three emotions were
included in the model, the predictive effect of CE on WTC was still significant, but
the parallel mediating effects of these emotions became evident. Mediation analysis
revealed that FLE, anxiety and boredom accounted of 57.59% of the total mediating
effect of CE on WTC. Perhaps not very surprisingly in light of correlational analyses,
it was enjoyment that explained by far the most of this influence, reaching 57.84%,
with the effect size of 29. Although the effects of anxiety and boredom were also
significant, they can be described as modest in this context. It points to the fact that
learners’ WTC hinges on creating a positive atmosphere in which all the constitutive
elements of CE, these related to the teacher, other students as well as learning tasks,
complement each other in generating a high level of enjoyment (cf. Dewaele &
MacIntyre, 2014, 2019). This finding differs somewhat from Dewaele and Dewaele
(2018) and Dewaele (2019) where anxiety was found to be a stronger (negative)
predictor of WTC than FLE. An intriguing question concerns what constitutes the
remaining 42% of CE which have an effect on the level of students’ WTC. One could
think here, for example, of teacher preparation for a particular class, the attitudes and
behaviour of other students but also access to requisite linguistics resources (e.g.,
lexis), as dictated by the requirements of the task (e.g., Dewaele & Pavelescu, 2021;
MacIntyre & Legatto; 2011; Pawlak & Mystkowska-Wiertelak, 2015). Obviously,
there is a wide range of other more or less enduring factors discussed by MacIntyre et
al. (1998), which might determine the response to CE and prevalence of some
emotions at the expense of others but cannot really be changed by what transpires in
the classroom.

Implications and limitations

Given the importance of speaking in L2 learning (see e.g., Kim, 2017), for which high
levels of WTC represent the indispensable intermediary step, the results of the present
study are of immediate relevance to practitioners. In the first place, it is clear that
different aspects of CE play a crucial role in shaping learners’ readiness to speak but
they also contribute to the emergence of negative and positive emotions which in turn
co-mediate the intensity of WTC. For this reason, it is essential for teachers to pay
attention to CE by providing learners with constant support, building positive
relationships among students and carefully choosing a good variety of activities in L2
lessons. Importantly, all those elements are multi-dimensional and interdependent. For
example, teacher support can be linked not only to individualizing instruction as much
as possible but also to building cohesiveness by experimenting with different types of
student groups, discussing with learners the types of tasks that could be the most
beneficial but also planning such tasks by introducing necessary vocabulary. Teachers
should also keep in mind to introduce an element of surprise in their classes, to keep
everybody alert. It could be a short song, or poem, or funny scene from YouTube, or
an unusual activity like acting out a disagreement or writing a love letter to a
well-known figure. As smiles appear on learners’ faces, their WTC will soar.
Enjoyment will trump the lingering effects of anxiety or boredom. In other words, by
improving the classroom climate, teachers can boost confidence and encourage
students to rise to the challenge posed by classroom tasks. Students who enjoy
themselves will want to join in the interactions. However, this focuses on boosting the
positive should distract teachers from anxiety and boredom lurking beneath the
surface. A fun activity can cease to be fun when it goes on for too long, anxiety can
spike if an activity becomes overly challenging, or if a peer makes a snide comment.
Thus, it is of vital importance for teachers to be on the constant look-out for potential
causes and symptoms of anxiety and boredom in an attempt to minimizing their
deleterious effects. They keep their finger on the pulse of the CE, making sure it
remains within lower and upper limits.
The present study is not without limitations. First, it is a prime example of a
macro-perspective where data collected from a large sample is subject to advanced
statistical procedures in order to identify general patterns. Although such a perspective
certainly has merit, it must be kept in mind that emotions enter into intricate and
unique interactions with contextual factors as well as with each other. Only a
micro-perspective can allow greater understanding of the genesis of these processes in
one specific context. Second, the study only relied on quantitative data collected in a
cross-sectional design, which limits the scope and types of insights that can be
gleaned about the relationships of CE, emotions and WTC. Further research could add
interviews, narratives or classroom observations in order to gain a more detailed
picture of such relationships and their potential causes. Third, as signalled above,
WTC levels also emanate from more enduring variables than just the nature of CE and
the emotions it evokes, and these factors were not investigated in this study. Fourth,
the findings are reflective of a very specific context, that is, university students
learning English in China. It would surely be insightful to see whether the results hold
in other national settings, lower educational levels (e.g., elementary or secondary
school) or other foreign languages. Lastly, there were only three items measuring
boredom and anxiety, respectively, extracted from the AEQ, which was originally
developed and validated in general education. It is thus suggested to adopt L2-specific
measurements in future research to better capture the nature and complexities of L2
learning contexts. Recommended measures are the Foreign Language Classroom
Anxiety Scale (FLCAS, Horwitz et al., 1986), the Short-form Foreign Language
Classroom Anxiety Scale (S-FLCAS, Botes et al., 2022), the Boredom in Practical
English Classes (BPELC, Pawlak et al., 2020c), and the Foreign Language Learning
Boredom Scale (FLLBS, Li et al., 2021), all of which were originally developed and
validated in the L2 learning contexts.

Conclusion

In the introduction, we compared the teacher faced with rows of sullen, silent,
unwilling students with the pilot of a jetliner desperate to take off, and yet not quite
reaching the speed needed for the wings to generate sufficient lift to allow the plane to
rise in the air. We acknowledged that teacher failure is not as costly as pilot error. We
also pointed out that teachers who are in command of their classroom can use
strategies to create a positive atmosphere that can lift the students out of their torpor
into active participation.
Teachers occupy a central node in a dynamic system. They can judge the
emotional temperature in the room and the temperature of every individual in it. The
current study on a very large sample of Chinese EFL students showed that there is no
single variable, nor a standard recipe, to make students speak. Rather, a complex
combination of classroom environment as well as teachers’ efforts aimed at increasing
students’ enjoyment, eliminating their boredom and managing their anxiety can be
expected to contribute to increased WTC. It is extremely likely that a positive
feedback loop exists, where the initial CE that affects students’ emotions – which then
shape their WTC – is boosted by the many voices of enthusiastic peers. To the casual
observer or the trainee teacher this process may appear to be magic; to the
experienced teacher it is the result of invisible hard work in the classroom drawing on
finely honed psychological and pedagogical skills.

References

Botes, E., van der Westhuizen, L., Dewaele, J. M., MacIntyre, P., & Greiff, S. (2022).
Validating the Short-form Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale. Applied
Linguistics. amac018, [Link]
Cao, Y., & Philp, J. (2006). Interactional context and willingness to communicate: A
comparison of behavior in whole class, group and dyadic interaction. System,
34(4), 480-493.
Clément, R., Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2003). Willingness to communicate in
a second language: The effects of context, norms, and vitality. Journal of
Language and Social Psychology, 22(2), 190-209.
Compton, L. (2004). Using text chat to improve willingness to communicate. In J.-B.
Son (Ed.), Computer-assisted language learning: Concepts, contexts, and
practices (pp. 123-144). New York, NY: iUniverse, Inc.
Compton, L. (2007). The impact of content and context on international teaching
assistants’ willingness to communicate in the language classroom. TESL-EJ,
10(4), 1-20.
Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York:
 Harper Collins.
Dewaele, J.-M. (2019) The effect of classroom emotions, attitudes toward English,
and teacher behaviour on Willingness to Communicate among English
foreign language learners. Journal of Language and Social Psychology,
38(4), 523-535.
Dewaele, J.-M. & Dewaele, L. (2018). Learner-internal and learner-external
predictors of willingness to communicate in the FL Classroom. Journal of
the European Second Language Association, 2, 24-37.
Dewaele, J.-M., Franco Magdalena, A., & Saito, K. (2019). The effect of perception
of teacher characteristics on Spanish EFL Learners’ anxiety and enjoyment.
The Modern Language Journal, 103(2), 412-427.
Dewaele, J.-M. & Pavelescu, L. (2021). The relationship between incommensurable
emotions and willingness to communicate in English as a foreign language:
A multiple case study. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 15(1),
66-80.
Dewaele, J.-M., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2014). The two faces of Janus? Anxiety and
enjoyment in the foreign language classroom. Studies in Second Language
Learning and Teaching, 4(2), 237-274. [Link]
Dewaele, J.-M., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2019). The predictive power of multicultural
personality traits, learner and teacher variables on foreign language enjoyment
and anxiety. In M. Sato & S. Loewen (Eds.), Evidence-based second language
pedagogy: A collection of instructed second language acquisition studies (pp.
263-286). London: Routledge.
Dewaele, J.-M., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2021). “You can’t start a fire without a spark”.
The emergence of flow in foreign language classrooms. Unpublished paper.
Dewaele, J.-M., Witney, J., Saito, K., & Dewaele, L. (2018). Foreign language
enjoyment and anxiety in the FL classroom: The effect of teacher and learner
variables. Language Teaching Research, 22(6), 676-697.
Donovan, L. A., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2005). Age and sex differences in willingness to
communicate, communication apprehension, and self-perceived competence.
Communication Research Reports, 21, 420-427.
Dorman, J. P., Fisher, D. L., & Waldrip, B. G. (2006). Classroom environment,
students’ perceptions of assessment, academic efficacy and attitude to science: A
Lisrel analysis. In F. Darrell & K. M. Swe (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to
research on learning environments: Worldviews (pp. 1-28). Singapore: World
Scientific.
Dorman, J. P., & Fraser, B. J. (2009). Psychosocial environment and affective
outcomes in technology-rich classrooms: Testing a causal model. Social
Psychology of Education, 12(1), 77-99.
Fraser, B. J. (1998). Classroom environment instruments: Development, validity and
applications. Learning Environments Research, 1(1), 7-34.
Fraser, B. J., Treagust, D. F., & Dennis, N. C. (1986). Development of an instrument
for assessing classroom psychosocial environment at universities and colleges.
Studies in Higher Education, 11(1), 43-54.
Goetz, T., & Hall, N. C. (2014). Academic boredom. In R. Pekrun & L.
Linnenbrink-Garcia (Eds.), International handbook of emotions in education (pp.
 311-330). New York: Routledge.
Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2007). Learning opportunities in preschool and early
elementary classrooms. In R. C. Pianta, M. J. Cox, & K. L. Snow (Eds.), School
readiness and the transition to kindergarten in the era of accountability (pp.
49-83). Baltimore/London/Sydney: Paul H. Brookes.
Harvey, S. T., Bimler, D., Evans, I. M., Kirkland, J., & Pechtel, P. (2012). Mapping
the classroom emotional environment. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(4),
628-640.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process
analysis. New York: Guilford Publications.
Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social
and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes.
Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 491-525.
Jiang, Y., & Dewaele, J.-M. (2019). How unique is the foreign language classroom
enjoyment and anxiety of Chinese EFL learners? System, 82, 13-25.
Khajavy, G. H., Ghonsooly, B., Fatemi, A. H., & Choi, C. W. (2016). Willingness to
communicate in English: A microsystem model in the Iranian EFL classroom
context. TESOL Quarterly, 50(1), 154-180.
Khajavy, G. H., MacIntyre, P. D., & Barabadi, E. (2018). Role of the emotions and
classroom environment in willingness to communicate: Applying doubly latent
multilevel analysis in second language acquisition research. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 40(3), 605-624.
[Link]
Kim, Y.-J. (2017). Cognitive-interactionist approaches to L2 instruction. In S. Loewen
& M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language
acquisition (pp. 126-145). New York: Routledge.
Kruk, M. (2021a). Changes in self-perceived willingness to communicate during
visits to Second Life: A case study. The Language Learning Journal, 49(2),
240-250. [Link]
Kruk, M. (2021b). Investigating dynamic relationships among individual difference
variables in learning English as a foreign language in a virtual world. Cham:
Springer.
Kruk, M. (2022). Dynamicity of perceived willingness to communicate, motivation,
boredom and anxiety in Second Life: the case of two advanced learners of
English. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(1-2), 190-216.
[Link]
Larson, R. W., & Richards, M. H. (1991). Boredom in the middle school years:
Blaming schools versus blaming students. American Journal of Education, 99(4),
418-433.
Li, C., Jiang, G., & Dewaele, J.-M. (2018). Understanding Chinese high school
students’ foreign language enjoyment: Validation of the Chinese version of the
foreign language enjoyment scale. System, 76, 183-196.
Li, C. (2021). A control-value theory approach to boredom in english classes among
university students in china. The Modern Language Journal, 105(1), 317-334.
Li, C., & Dewaele, J.-M. (2020). The role of trait emotional intelligence and online
learning achievement perception on foreign language class boredom among
 Cchinese university. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 5, 33-44.
Li, C., Dewaele, J.-M., & Hu, Y. (2021). Foreign language learning boredom:
conceptualization and measurement. Applied Linguistics Review.
[Link]
Li, C., Huang, J., & Li, B. (2021). The predictive effects of classroom environment
and trait emotional intelligence on foreign language enjoyment and anxiety.
System, 96, 102393. [Link]
Li, C., & Wei, L. (2022). Anxiety, enjoyment, and boredom in language learning
amongst junior secondary students in rural China: How do they contribute to L2
achievement? Studies in Second Language Acquisition. In press. DOI:
10.1017/S0272263122000031
Liu, Y., & Park, H. (2012). A study of Korean EFL learners’ WTC and motivation.
Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 35-58.
MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S., Clément, R., & Donovan, L. A. (2003). Talking in order
to learn: Willingness to communicate and intensive language programs. Canadian
Modern Language Review, 59, 589-607.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes and affect as predictors
of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology,
15(1), 3-26.
MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing
willingness to communicate in L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and
affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 545-562.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Legatto, J. J. (2011). A dynamic system approach to willingness
to communicate: Developing an idiodynamic method to capture rapidly changing
affect. Applied Linguistics, 32(2), 149-171.
McCroskey, J. C., & Baer, J. E. (1985). Willingness to communicate: The construct
and its measurement. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech
Communication Association, Denver, CO.
McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1987). Willingness to communicate. In J. C.
McCroskey & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Personality and interpersonal communication
(pp. 129-156). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
Mercer, S., & Dörnyei, Z. (2020). Engaging learners in contemporary classrooms.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A., & Pawlak, M. (2017). Willingness to communicate in
instructed second language acquisition: Combining a macro- and
micro-perspective. Bristol-Buffalo-Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
Nett, U. E., Goetz, T., & Hall, N. C. (2011). Coping with boredom in school: An
experience sampling perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36,
49-59.
Patrick, H., Kaplan, A., & Ryan, A. M. (2011). Positive classroom motivational
environments: Convergence between mastery goal structure and classroom social
climate. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 367-382.
Pawlak, M., Kruk, M., & Zawodniak, J. (2020a). Investigating individual trajectories
in experiencing boredom in the language classroom: The case of 11 Polish
students of English. Language Teaching Research,
[Link]
Pawlak, M., Kruk, M., & Zawodniak, J. (2020b). Individual trajectories of boredom in
 learning English as a foreign language at the university level: Insights from three
students’ self-reported experience. Innovation in Language Learning and
Teaching. [Link]
Pawlak, M., Kruk, M., Zawodniak, J., & Pasikowski, S. (2020c). Investigating factors
responsible for boredom in English classes: The case of advanced learners.
System, 91, 102259. [Link]
Pawlak, M., & Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A. (2015). Investigating the dynamic nature of
L2 willingness to communicate. System, 50, 1-9.
Pawlak, M., Zawodniak, J., & Kruk, M. (2020). Boredom in the foreign language
classroom: A micro-perspective. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Daniels, L. M., Stupnisky, R. H., & Perry, R. P. (2010).
Boredom in achievement settings: Exploring control–value antecedents and
performance outcomes of a neglected emotion. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 102(3), 531-549.
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Barchfeld, P., & Perry, R. P. (2011). Measuring
emotions in students’ learning and performance: The Achievement Emotions
Questionnaire (AEQ). Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 36-48.
Peng, J. (2007). Willingness to communicate in the Chinese EFL classroom: Acultural
perspective. In J. Liu (Ed.), English language teaching in China: New
approaches, perspectives and standards (pp. 250-269). Bodmin, Cornwall:
Continuum.
Peng, J., & Woodrow, L. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English: A model in
the Chinese EFL classroom context. Language Learning, 60(4), 834-876.
Piechurska-Kuciel, E. (2011a). Willingness to communicate in L2 and self-perceived
levels of FL skills in Polish adolescents. In J. Arabski & A. Wojtaszek (Eds.),
Aspects of culture in second language acquisition and foreign language learning
(pp. 235-250). Heidelberg: Springer.
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2
research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878-912.
Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012).
Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 700-712.
Weaver, C. (2005). Using the Rasch model to develop a measure of second language
learners’ willingness to communicate within a language classroom. Journal of
Applied Measurement, 6(4), 396-415.
Weaver, C. (2007). Willingness to communicate: A mediating factor in the interaction
between learners and tasks. In K. Van den Branden, K. Van Gorp, & M. Verhelst
(Eds.), Tasks in action: Task-based language education from a classroom-based
perspective (pp. 159-193). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Wu, C.-P., & Lin, H.-J. (2014). Anxiety about speaking a foreign language as a
mediator of the relation between motivation and willingness to communicate.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 119(3), 785-798.
Xia, Y., & Xu, Y. (2018). On the Influence of classroom environment on negative
academic emotions of English majors. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 3,
65-76+144-145.
Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese
 EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 54-66.
Zawodniak, J., & Kruk, M. (2019). Boredom in the English language classroom: An
investigation of three language learners. Konin Language Studies, 7(2), 197-214.
Zawodniak, J., Kruk, M., & Chumas, J. (2017). Towards conceptualizing boredom as
an emotion in the EFL academic context. Konin Language Studies, 5(4),
425-441.