elt voices indiaeltvoices.in/volume3/evi_31_6.pdfcognitive style and the use of idioms in ......

[Type text]

ELT Voices – India Volume 3 Issue 1 | February 2013

ISSN 2230-9136

© Ignite (India) Publishing, Bhavnagar, Gujarat – India

www.eltvoices.in

ELT Research Paper 6

On the Relationship between Impulsivity/Reflectivity Cognitive Style and the Use of Idioms in Composition Writing Among Iranian Advanced EFL Learners Mahdi Mahdavinia (Ph.D.) Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran

Maryam Molavizadeh (M.A.) Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran

Mahdi Mahdavinia & Maryam Molavizadeh: On the Relationship between Impulsivity/Reflectivity Cognitive Style and the

Use of Idioms in Composition Writing Among Iranian Advanced EFL Learners

49 | E L T V o i c e s – I n d i a ( V o l . 3 I s s u e 1 ) | F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 3 | I S S N 2 2 3 0 - 9 1 3 6

Abstract

The main purpose of the present research was to see if Impulsivity/Reflectivity as two

cognitive styles of learners may indicate any relationship with the use of idioms in

composition writing among Iranian Advanced EFL learners. To this end,80 male and

female university students completing their studies for an M.A. degree in TEFL took

part in this study. They were given a TOEFL test to ensure their homogeneity of

language proficiency and a Persian version of Impulsivity Sub-scale of Eysenck's

(1990) Impulsiveness Questionnaire to divide the participants into two groups of High

Impulsive and Low Impulsive (Reflective). Then they were given a Love Story which

was consisted of 20 Idioms and at last they were asked to write two compositions

according to the given topics related to the Love story. The results of the study revealed

that Low Impulsive (Reflective) learners used more idioms in their writings than the

other participants. Language learners and teachers of TEFL may benefit from the

findings of this study.

Keywords: Cognitive Style, Idiom, Impulsivity, Reflectivity, Writing.




1. Introduction

It is stated by many educators that one's success in learning a second language in all

educational settings is primarily dependent on theories of second language acquisition. The

researchers had to understand what, how, and why it is that is acquired, and thus a lot of

theories were produced by second language acquisition researchers such as discourse

theory, accommodation theory, neuro-functional theory, the monitor model, etc. This

theorizing is the intricacy of the process of second language acquisition which in Ellis’s

(2003) view is a complex process, involving many interrelated factors.

To study this complexity, language researchers suggested theories that generalized in nature

and often not productive. These theories denied individual differences and looked for just to

illustrate globally how people learn, and what common characteristics there are in language

learning. Even though these theories have contributed much to our overall understanding of

second language acquisition, the fact still remains that some individuals are more successful

at acquiring an L2 than are others (Jamieson, 1992; Brown, 2000). Examining of learners

variables and individual characteristics is the researchers' works in this area to explain

differences in one's ability to acquire an L2. Since many studies have tried to connect

learning differences to variables such as gender, age, brain plasticity, and lateral cerebral

dominance (Krashen, 1975; Walsh & Diller, 1981; Selinker, 1982), other researchers have

concentrated on variables such as integrative and instrumental motivation, attitude, anxiety,

aptitude, ambiguity tolerance, field dependence/independence, and reflectivity/ impulsivity

(Chapelle & Roberts, 1986; Oxford, 1989). In recent years, language researchers and teachers

have begun to focus on the individual differences of learners, such as age, language

proficiency, learning motivation, cognitive styles and so on.

Cognitive style or "thinking style" is a term used in cognitive psychology to describe the way

individuals think, perceive and remember information. Kogan (1981) studied the educational

implications of nine different cognitive styles, and concluded that the implications of

Reflection-Impulsivity (R-I) on several areas of personality, behavior, and learning were

noticeable. Neil Salkind and John Wright (1977) studies have found that students who are

placed with a reflective teacher tend to score more reflectivity at the end of the year than at

the beginning, while students placed with an impulsive teacher score higher levels of

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_psychology




impulsivity at the end of the year. This indicates that there is some environmental influence

on the level of reflectivity-impulsivity and its expression in student behavior.

2. Review of the related literature

The aims of language teaching are usually termed through the four skills: listening, speaking,

reading and writing (Seidlhofer & Widdowson, 1999). L2 writing is a complex process.

Writing is a process of forming a text as a communicative bridge between the reader and the

writer. As for writing in EFL, French and Rhoder (1992) stated that writing could be viewed

as the main area in the curriculum that we associate with creativity, noting that writing is one

of the most tasks that we can be asked to perform. Writing is a demanding activity especially

for learners of a second /foreign language and yet it is a skill that they have to master in order

to do well in content courses. Using idioms, phrases or sentences that cannot be

understood literally and most of which have historical, philosophical, sociocultural, or

even political origin, in writing reflects the transformation in conceptualization of the

universe and the relationship between human beings and the universe. Previous studies

indicated that English idioms are difficult for English native speakers, and then they would be

much more problematic for ESL/EFL learners (Cooper, 1999; Buchwald, 2000). For many

EFL learners to use idioms in their writing is sometimes a troublesome part of writing.

Idioms make up a large proportion of any discourse, and the comprehension and production

of them are the main parts of the studies of idiomaticity in both first and the second language

literature. This study therefore aimed to find the answer to the following question:

Can any significant relationship be found between impulsivity/reflectivity cognitive style and

Iranian advanced EFL learners' use of idioms in writing composition?

Impulsivity and reflectivity

Impulsivity (I) and Reflectivity(R) are two characteristic of human beings in cognitive

domain. Kagan (1965), classifies reflective person as "the individual who takes relatively

longer respond and make fewer errors" and believes that "impulsive attitude begins its growth

during the preschool years and may be a deeply entrenched habit". Block et al. (1974) believe

that reflective learners are "slow deciders in uncertain situations" while impulsive ones are

"quick deciders in uncertain circumstances" (p.611). Zelinker and Jeffrey (1976) believe that

reflectivity may not always be the most optimal style. They found that "reflective children do




better on tasks that require analyses of fine internal detail; impulsive children do better on

tasks requiring attention to outer contours of objects and global comparisons. Messer (1976)

claims that young children are typically impulsive, as they grow older, they become more

reflective. They take longer to respond, and they also become more accurate. It has been

found that children who are conceptually reflective tend to make fewer errors in reading than

impulsive children. (Kagan.1965). Messer (1976), considers that "Reflectivity/Impulsivity is

the extent to which a person reflects on a solution to a problem for which several choices are

potential" (p.532). Brown (2000) states that impulsivity is a person's quick or gambling guess

at an answer to a problem and Reflectivity is a person's slower and more calculated decision.

Brown (2000) further asserts that "impulsive persons are usually faster readers, and

eventually master the psycholinguistic guessing game of reading such that their

impulsive style of reading may not necessarily deter comprehension." According to Kagan

(1965), the impulsive child places a greater value on "quick success" than on "avoided

failure". In contrast a reflective child demonstrates higher standards for mastering intellectual

tasks and attempts to solve problems in a deliberate and correct way.

3. Methodology

3.1. Participants

The hypothetical population of this study was 80 advanced university students randomly

selected from among students completing their studies for an MA degree TEFL regardless of

their personality characteristics and gender. These participants were selected from a

population of 80 students of Azad universities on the basis of their scores on the TOEFL test.

Every effort has been taken to select the participants from as homogeneous a population as

possible. For this reason, it has been tried to select the participants with an advanced level of

English language proficiency according to their scores ranging from 60 to 90 from 90 on

the TOEFL test. By doing so, the effect of proficiency factor on the writing performance of

the learners was minimized. On the basis of the results of a revised version of Eysenck

Personality Questionnaire (I7), the participants were assigned into two groups of high

impulsive and low impulsive.

3.2. Instrumentation

The following instruments were utilized to measure the variables under investigation:




TOEFL Test

In order to be sure that we had more homogenous participants, a version of TOEFL test was

used as a proficiency test to determine the participants' level of language proficiency.

The test consisted of two sections of structure and reading with 90 items. The structure

section consisted of 40 items, and the reading section consisted of 50 items, each with four

alternative choices from which the participants chose the correct response.

Impulsivity Subscale of Eysenck’s Impulsiveness Questionnaire (I7) (IVE)

Impulsivity Subscale of Eysenck’s Impulsiveness Questionnaire (I7) (IVE) ultimate adult I7

Impulsiveness questionnaire Impulsiveness, Venturesomeness and Empathy. Eysenck’s

(1990) Impulsiveness Questionnaire contains 54 items and assesses Impulsiveness (19 items),

venturesomeness (16 items) and Empathy (19 items). A Farsi version of this questionnaire

was prepared by Salimi (2001), and its Impulsiveness subscale was also validated with 1820

subjects from Tarbiat Modarres University. The reliability of the Persian Impulsiveness

subscale was tested using Cronbach’s alpha and Spearman-Brown’s unusual-length split half

reliability. Alpha reliability was found to be 0.86 and split half reliability was found to be

0.86, which are acceptable indicators of reliability. The same Farsi version of impulsivity

subscale serves the Impulsivity scale of the present research. A short love story which

consisted of 20 idioms and two topics which emotionally were related to the short story were

also used.

3.3. Procedures

TOEFL Administration

The TOEFL test was administered to 80 university students from Azad universities of

Tehran. This test was composed of 2 sections with 90 items, Structure and Reading sections.

The first section consisted of 40 items and the second one had 50items, each with four

alternative choices from which the participants chose the correct response. From 80 students

of Azad universities of Tehran who had participated in the TOEFL test, 40 of them who had

got higher scores were selected.

Questionnaire Administration




Then the participants took the prepared Persian Impulsiveness Subscale (IVE) (I7) for which

they were required to mark their answers on the questionnaire itself. The range of

Impulsiveness scores was between 19 and 95. The time allocated to this test was 10 minutes.

According to the test guide, the participants who received the scores between 19 and 57 had

to be categorized in group 1 – high impulsive participants – and the participants who received

the scores between 58 and 95 had to be categorized in group 2 – low

impulsive(reflective)participants. In this category, 22 participants were in the first group, and

18 participants placed in the second group.

Compositions Writing Administration

Then the researcher asked the 40 participants to take part in a composition writing

administration in which they were asked to study a text consisted of 20 idioms, first. Then,

after 2 weeks they were given a topic related to the text they had already read, and they were

asked to write a composition by using the idioms of that text as many as possible. In order the

research results to be reliable, 10 days after the first administration, the researcher asked the

40 participants to take part in the same composition administration with another related topic.

Here the researcher calculated the correlation between the first and the second composition

scores of the participants in each group by SPSS. As shown in table.3.7., and table.3.8., the

results proved to be significant at the 0.01 level, with the correlation of 0.658 and 0.642

respectively each of which shows high positive correlation between the scores.

Table.3.7. The correlation between the first and the second administrations of group 1- high

impulsive participants.

Correlations

S1 S2

S1 Pearson Correlation 1 .658**

Sig. (2-tailed) .001

N 22 22

S2 Pearson Correlation .658** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .001 N 22 22

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

S1= The scores of the first administration

S2= The scores of the second administration




Table.3.8. The correlation between the first and the second administrations of group 2- low

impulsive participants.

Correlations

S1 S2

S1 Pearson Correlation 1 .642**

Sig. (2-tailed) .004

N 18 18

S2 Pearson Correlation .642** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .004 N 18 18

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

S1= The scores of the first administration

S2= The scores of the second administration

As each set of scores showed high positive correlation, the mean of two administration scores

of each group was the ultimate score of the participants, as shown in table.3.9., and

table.3.10.

Table 3.9. The ultimate composition scores of group 1- high impulsive participants.

The Ultimate

Composition

Scores

IVE Test TOEFL

Test

Subjects

7 49 82 1

9 50 81 2

4 51 81 3

6 24 80 4

9 38 80 5

8 29 79 6

8 53 79 7

3 27 78 8

5 33 77 9

4 45 77 10

6 34 77 11

7 33 75 12

5 27 75 13

7 46 75 14

9 25 75 15

6 47 73 16

4 28 73 17

8 27 72 18




3 33 69 19

6 36 67 20

5 54 67 21

8 37 66 22

Table 3.10. The ultimate composition scores of group 2- low impulsive participants.

The Ultimate

Composition

Scores

IVE Test TOEFL

Test

Subjects

16 86 82 1

16 73 82 2

14 63 80 3

13 83 80 4

15 81 80 5

14 68 79 6

12 67 78 7

14 71 77 8

14 67 76 9

14 82 75 10

15 85 74 11

13 60 73 12

11 81 73 13

14 64 72 14

16 69 71 15

12 79 70 16

11 73 70 17

14 72 66 18

4. Results and Discussion

Table 4.1. demonstrates the means and standard deviations of group 1 and group 2. Figure

4.1. in which the means comparison between two groups is depicted, follows the table.

Table.4.1. Means and standard deviations of group 1 & group 2 of the study

Std. Deviation Mean Material

Group 2 Group 1 Group 2 Group 1

1.92 1.55 6.23 13.78 The

Composition

Scores

Group 1= High impulsive participants. N=22




Group 2= Low impulsive participants. N=18

Figure 4.1. The means of group 1 & group 2 of the study

An independent sample t-test was run in order to compare the means of two groups of the

study in order to test the null hypothesis which was “High impulsivity/Low impulsivity

cognitive style has no significant relationship with Iranian advanced EFL learners’ use of

idioms in writing compositions”. The result is shown in table 4.2.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Group 1 Group 2

The Composition Score




Table.4.2. Independent Samples t-test for the ultimate scores of group 1 & group 2.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test

for Equality

of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df

Sig.

(2-tailed)

Mean

Differenc

e

Std. Error

Difference

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Q

1

Equal

variances

assumed

1.87

1

.179 -

13.426

38 .000 -7.551 .562 -8.689 -6.412

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-

13.719

37.9

98

.000 -7.551 .555 -8.665 -6.436

Based on the result, t-test for equality of means shows that whether equal variances are

assumed or not, in both conditions sig= .000 which is less than 0.05, so the null hypothesis

“High impulsivity/Low impulsivity cognitive style has no significant relationship with

Iranian advanced EFL learners’ use of idioms in writing compositions” is rejected meaning

that there actually is a relationship. Besides, taking the confidence interval of the difference

double ensured us of the same conclusion, given that there is no 0 between -8.665 and -6.436.

It further verifies the fact that means are not equal and therefore the previously stated null

hypothesis is rejected.

5. Conclusions and Implications

The outcome of the presented study related to the research question revealed that in high

Impulsive group there was a negative directional relationship between I/R cognitive style and

the learners' use of idioms in writing composition. Also the obtained result delineated that in

low Impulsive (Reflective) group there was a positive directional relationship between I/R

cognitive style and the learners' use of idioms in writing composition.




Findings reported in this study pertain to the effect of cognitive styleon use of idioms in

writing composition. The researchers believe that utmost implication of this study may also

be of great value for syllabus designers, material developers, and educational managers, when

preparing and designingwriting materials. In other words, they should take the learner into

account at every stage of designing a syllabus, all the learner’s affective and cognitive

factors. The course designers then can produce an integrated series of teaching and learning

experiences. This is consistent with findings by Schunk (1989, cited in Chularut and

Debacker, 2004) that students who believed they were learning a useful strategy had tendency

to feel efficacious about improving their writing.

References

Block, J., Block, J. H., & Harrington, D. M. (1974). Some misgivings about the Matching

Familiar Figures Test as a measure of reflection-impulsivity. Developmental Psychology, 10,

611–632

Brown, H.D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching ( 4th

ed.).New York:

Pearson Education.

Buchwald, A. (2000). Don’t say ‘let’s get together’ to a foreigner. In S. K. Cohen(Ed.),

Building reading fluency: Words in focus (pp. 104-105). Singapore: Thomas Learning.

Chapelle, C., & Cheryl, R. (1984). Ambiguity tolerance and field independence as predictors

of proficiency in English as a second language. Language Learning 36,7-45.

Chularut, P., & DeBacker, T. K. (2004). The influence of concept mapping on achievement,

self-regulation, and self-efficacy in students of English as a second language. Contemporary

Educational Psychology, 29, 284-263.

Cooper, T. C. (1999). Processing of idioms by L2 learners of English. TESOL Quarterly, 33,

233-262.

Ellis, R. (2003). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Eysenck, H. (1990). Biological dimensions of personality. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of

personality: Theory and research (pp. 244–276). New York: Guilford.




French, N., & Rhoder, C. (1992).Teaching thinking skills. Garland Publication, INC, NY,

USA, 238.

Jamieson, J. (1992). The cognitive style of reflection/ impulsivity & field independence &

ESL success. Modern Language Journal, 76, 491-501.

Kagan, J. (1965). Reflection-impulsivity and reading ability in primary grade children. Child

Development, 37,583-594.

Kogan, N. (1981). La psicología en la práctica educativa. Mexico: Trillas.

Krashen, S. D. (1975). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford:

Pergamum Press.

Messer, S.B. (1976). Reflection-impulsivity: a review. Psychological Bulletin. 83, 1026-

1052.

Oxford, R. (1989). The role of styles and strategies in second language learning. Eric Digest:

Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics, 1, 39-48.

Salimi, E. (2001). On the relationship between impulsivity-reflectivity cognitive style and

performance in Tmu English proficiency test. Unpublished Master dissertation, TMUIran,

Iran

Salkind, N. J., & Wright, J. (1977). The development of reflection: Impulsivity and cognitive

efficiency. Human Development 20, 377-387

Zelinker, L., & Jeffrey, S. (1976). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics,

10(2), 201-223.




ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Mahdi Mahdavinia is a scholar activist with a Ph.D. in education (Curriculum Studies) from

the University of Toronto in Ontario (OISE/UT), Canada, where he carried research and did

his doctoral dissertation in the field of holistic education and its operation in Iran. He is a

Professor of English at the University of Azad, South Tehran Branch. Dr. Mahdavinia’s

research interest centers on holistic education and language learning. His current research is

on holistic education and curriculum development.

Maryam Molavizadeh is an M.A. graduate student in TEFL from South Tehran Branch of

Islamic Azad University. She has recently finished her M.A. studies at the above mentioned

university. She has been teaching English for 5 years in qualified English institutes.

elt voices indiaeltvoices.in/volume3/evi_31_6.pdfcognitive style and the use of idioms in ......

Documents