Abdullah A. Alamer, Richard L. Sparks, Philip S. Dale
{"title":"Rethinking Second Language Anxiety: Looking Beyond the Classic View of the Anxiety → Achievement Relationship","authors":"Abdullah A. Alamer, Richard L. Sparks, Philip S. Dale","doi":"10.1111/modl.70092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A large and emerging body of evidence has challenged the classic view that L2 anxiety is a causal factor in L2 learning achievement and that when anxiety is mitigated, L2 proficiency improves. This classic “anxiety → achievement” view has three major problems. First, studies frequently draw causal conclusions from cross‐sectional associations, even though such designs cannot establish temporal precedence and are highly vulnerable to reverse causality and confounding. Second, common L2 anxiety self‐report instruments embed language skills and self‐perceived competence within item content, inflating anxiety–achievement correlations. Third, the classic view on anxiety has developed an “anxiety monoculture”: a persistent tendency to favor the affective interpretation “anxiety → achievement” while neglecting rival explanations, language‐related confounds, and falsification‐oriented designs. In this paper, we synthesize evidence from longitudinal and experimental work indicating that language achievement more plausibly precedes anxiety than the reverse, and provide pedagogical implications that highlight emotional support as an important resource in the process rather than a key causal factor. We then propose an alternative research agenda for the new view on L2 anxiety comprising four components: (a) stronger causal‐inference designs, including longitudinal and experimental approaches; (b) improved measurement standards that decouple anxiety from language ability; (c) explicit accounting for language achievement and L2 aptitude measures when modeling the anxiety–achievement relationship; and (d) reconceptualizing anxiety as a reflection of the learner's concurrent level of language proficiency, which can decrease as language competence and language achievement grow. We argue that progress in conceptualizing L2 anxiety depends crucially on moving beyond past designs and interpretations by adopting these recommendations.","PeriodicalId":42049,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF THE MIDWEST MODERN LANGUAGE ASSOCIATION","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF THE MIDWEST MODERN LANGUAGE ASSOCIATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.70092","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
A large and emerging body of evidence has challenged the classic view that L2 anxiety is a causal factor in L2 learning achievement and that when anxiety is mitigated, L2 proficiency improves. This classic “anxiety → achievement” view has three major problems. First, studies frequently draw causal conclusions from cross‐sectional associations, even though such designs cannot establish temporal precedence and are highly vulnerable to reverse causality and confounding. Second, common L2 anxiety self‐report instruments embed language skills and self‐perceived competence within item content, inflating anxiety–achievement correlations. Third, the classic view on anxiety has developed an “anxiety monoculture”: a persistent tendency to favor the affective interpretation “anxiety → achievement” while neglecting rival explanations, language‐related confounds, and falsification‐oriented designs. In this paper, we synthesize evidence from longitudinal and experimental work indicating that language achievement more plausibly precedes anxiety than the reverse, and provide pedagogical implications that highlight emotional support as an important resource in the process rather than a key causal factor. We then propose an alternative research agenda for the new view on L2 anxiety comprising four components: (a) stronger causal‐inference designs, including longitudinal and experimental approaches; (b) improved measurement standards that decouple anxiety from language ability; (c) explicit accounting for language achievement and L2 aptitude measures when modeling the anxiety–achievement relationship; and (d) reconceptualizing anxiety as a reflection of the learner's concurrent level of language proficiency, which can decrease as language competence and language achievement grow. We argue that progress in conceptualizing L2 anxiety depends crucially on moving beyond past designs and interpretations by adopting these recommendations.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the Midwest Modern Language Association publishes articles on literature, literary theory, pedagogy, and the state of the profession written by M/MLA members. One issue each year is devoted to the informal theme of the recent convention and is guest-edited by the year"s M/MLA president. This issue presents a cluster of essays on a topic of broad interest to scholars of modern literatures and languages. The other issue invites the contributions of members on topics of their choosing and demonstrates the wide range of interests represented in the association. Each issue also includes book reviews written by members on recent scholarship.