Home Listener engagement: the missing link in research on accented speech
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Listener engagement: the missing link in research on accented speech

  • Bradford J. Lee ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: March 3, 2022
International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching
From the journal International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching Volume 61 Issue 4

Abstract

Reverse linguistic stereotyping (RLS) is a process whereby a speaker’s perceived group membership triggers differential perception of aspects of their speech. RLS has been suggested to cause drops in intelligibility and recall, though why perception of a non-existent accent can negatively affect listening outcomes has not been sufficiently elucidated. The current study suggests an explanation may lie in differential levels of engagement among listeners. A sample of 430 Japanese university students listened to a short speech from either a speaker of Chinese Pronunciation of English or Received Pronunciation and rated them on aesthetics, comprehensibility, perceived intelligibility, engagement, and recall. Multiple linear regression suggested that only engagement served as a significant predictor to recall, though the other variables all had significant indirect effects when engagement was included as a mediating variable. These results indicated that listener engagement is a key variable which may help improve our understanding of accented speech perception.

Keywords: accentedness; attention; comprehensibility; engagement; intelligibility
Corresponding author: Bradford J. Lee, Fukui University of Technology, 3-6-1 Gakuen, 910-8505, Fukui, Japan, E-mail:
Appendix

Appendix A: Listening passage script with idea units denoted

Bold: Idea Units Italics: Other Possible Answers as an Alternative Number of Idea Units
What1 did you2 do3 over your summer vacation/summer/vacation4? 4
As for me, I5 had a wonderful6 time7. 3
First8, I9 went back/went/back10 to my hometown11. 4
to visit12 my parents/parents13 and my younger14 brother/brother15 4
It was16 the first time17 I’d been back/back18 in about 819 months20, 5
so21 my mother/mother22 was happy23 to see24 me25. 5
My parents’/parents’26 house27 is very big/big28, 3
but29 it’s30 also very old/old31 3
and so32 some parts/parts33 are a little broken/broken34. 3
I helped/helped35 my father/father36 cut down/cut37 some old trees/trees38 4
and we (also39) painted/painted40 the walls/walls41 with a fresh42 coat43 of white44 paint45. 7
I also/also46 had some time/time47 to meet up/meet48 with my old friends/friends49. 4
Me50 and three51 friends52 from my hometown53 went out/went54 to lunch55 one day56, 7
and we (also57) saw58 a movie/movie59 called “Stand Up”60. 4
It was61 a story/story62 about a comedian63, but it was64 not65 very funny/funny66. 6
Total max Score 66

Appendix B: Data collection instrument (with English translation)

1. 発言者の発音の好感度はどうでしたか?
(How do you feel about the speaker’s accent?)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(とても嫌いだった) (とても好きだった)
(I hate this accent) (I love this accent)
2. 発言者が話した内容はどれぐらい分かりやすかったですか?
(How easy was it for you to understand what the speaker was saying?)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(とても聞きにくかった) (とても聞きやすかった)
(Very difficult) (Very easy)
3. 発言者が話した内容に対して、あなたの理解度はどれぐらいでしたか?
(How much could you understand of what the speaker said?)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(全く分からなかった) (全部分かった)
(Nothing) (Everything)
4. 話を最後までじっくり聞きましたか?
(Did you listen to the speech carefully to the end, or lose concentration partway?)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(すぐに飽きた) (最後まで集中して聞いた)
(I lost concentration immediately) (I concentrated to the end)
5. お話の内容(文、若しくは単語)、覚えているかぎり以下に書いて下さい。日本語でも英語、どっちでも大丈夫です。つづりは間違っても構いませんのでなるべく多く書いて下さい。
(Please write down any and all words or phrases that you remember from the speech. English or Japanese are both acceptable. Do not worry about spelling. Please be as thorough as possible.)

Appendix C: Shapiro–Wilk test of normality

Shapiro–Wilk normality of distribution output
Variable Group RP Group CP
Statistic df p Statistic df p
Attractiveness 0.94a 215 <0.001 0.95a 215 <0.001
Comprehensibility 0.94a 215 <0.001 0.93a 215 <0.001
Perceived intelligibility 0.92a 215 <0.001 0.87a 215 <0.001
Engagement 0.95a 215 <0.001 0.93a 215 <0.001
Recollection 0.92a 215 <0.001 0.89a 215 <0.001

  1. aIndicates significance at the < 0.001 level.

Appendix D: Bivariate regression output

Bivariate regression output (recollection as dependent variable)
Group B SE B β
RP Aesthetics 1.39 0.18 0.48a
Comp. 1.29 0.17 0.45a
Perceived Intel. 0.93 0.18 0.34a
CP Aesthetics 1.02 0.14 0.44a
Comp. 0.65 0.15 0.28a
Perceived Intel. 0.87 0.19 0.31a

  1. ap < 0.001.

Bivariate regression output (engagement as dependent variable)
Group B SE B β
RP Aesthetics 0.80 0.07 0.60a
Comp. 0.72 0.07 0.55a
Perceived Intel. 0.45 0.08 0.37a
CP Aesthetics 0.63 0.07 0.51a
Comp. 0.43 0.08 0.34a
Perceived Intel. 0.58 0.10 0.39a

  1. ap < 0.001.

References

Ableeva, Rumia & Jim Lantolf. 2011. Mediated dialogue and the microgenesis of second language listening comprehension. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 18(2). 133–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2011.555330.Search in Google Scholar

Amano, Shuichi. 2005. Nihonjin eigo gakushusha no hibogoeigo ni taisuru taido [Japanese learners’ attitudes towards nonnative English: Influence of the nonnative accents on the evaluation]. Tagenbunka 5. 1–14.Search in Google Scholar

Aubrey, Scott. 2017. Inter-cultural contact and flow in a task-based Japanese EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research 21(6). 717–734. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816683563.Search in Google Scholar

Baralt, Melissa, Laura Gurzynski-Weiss & YouJin Kim. 2016. Engagement with language: How examining learners’ affective and social engagement explains successful learner-generated attention to form. In Masatoshi Sato & Susan Ballinger (eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda, 209–240. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.45.09barSearch in Google Scholar

Barber, Anita D. & Cameron S. Carter. 2005. Cognitive control involved in overcoming prepotent response tendencies and switching between tasks. Cerebral Cortex 15(7). 899–912. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhh189.Search in Google Scholar

Betts, Jennifer, Jenny Mckay, Paul Maruff & Vicki Anderson. 2006. The development of sustained attention in children: The effect of age and task load. Child Neuropsychology 12(3). 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/09297040500488522.Search in Google Scholar

Bishop, Hywel, Nikolas Coupland & Peter Garrett. 2005. Conceptual accent evaluation: Thirty years of accent prejudice in the UK. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 37(1). 131–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/03740463.2005.10416087.Search in Google Scholar

Bourhis, Richard Y., Rana Sioufi & Itesh Sachdev. 2012. Ethnolinguistic interaction and multilingual communication. In Howard Giles (ed.), The handbook of intergroup communication, 100–115. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Bradbury, Niel A. 2016. Attention span during lectures: 8 seconds, 10 minutes, or more? Advances in Physiology Education 40(4). 509–513. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00109.2016.Search in Google Scholar

Browne, Charlie, Brent Culligan & Joseph Phillips. 2013. The New general Service list. Available at: http://www.newgeneralservicelist.org/.Search in Google Scholar

Ceh, Simon M., Sonja Annerer-Walcher, Christof Körner, Christian Rominger, Silvia E. Kober, Andreas Fink & Mathias Benedek. 2020. Neurophysiological indicators of internal attention: An electroencephalography–eye-tracking coregistration study. Brain and Behavior 10. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.1790.Search in Google Scholar

Clark, Herbert H. & Deanna Wilkes-Gibbs. 1986. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition 22(1). 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(86)90010-7.Search in Google Scholar

Cohen, Jacob. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Routledge Academic.Search in Google Scholar

Deng, Jun, Amy Holtby, Lori Howden-Weaver, Lesli Nessim, Bonnie Nicholas, Kathleen Nickle, C. Pannekoek, Sabine Stephan & Miao Sun. 2009. English pronunciation research: The neglected orphan of second language acquisition studies? (WP 05-09). Edmonton, AB: Prairie Metropolis Centre.Search in Google Scholar

Derwing, Tracey M. & Murray J. Munro. 1997. Accent, intelligibility, and comprehensibility: Evidence from four L1s. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19(1). 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263197001010.Search in Google Scholar

Dodd, Carley H. 1986. Dynamics of intercultural communication, 2nd edn. Dubuque, IA: W. C. Brown.Search in Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Zoltàn. 2001. The motivational basis for language learning tasks. In Peter Robinson (ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning, 137–158. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.2.10dorSearch in Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Zoltàn. 2009. The L2 motivational self system. In Zoltàn Dörnyei & Emi Ushioda (eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self, 9–42. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847691293-003Search in Google Scholar

Egbert, Joy. 2003. A study of flow theory in the foreign language classroom. The Modern Language Journal 87(4). 499–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00204.Search in Google Scholar

Field, John. 2003. Promoting perception: Lexical segmentation in L2 listening. ELT Journal 57(4). 325–334. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/57.4.325.Search in Google Scholar

Franklin, Michael S., James M. Broadway, Michael D. Mrazek, Jonathan Smallwood & Jonathan W. Schooler. 2013. Window into the wandering mind: Pupillometry of spontaneous through while reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 66(12). 2289–2294. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.858170.Search in Google Scholar

Frydenberg, Erica, Mary Ainley & Valerie Russell. 2005. Schooling issue digest: Student motivation and engagement. Melbourne: Australia Department of Education, Science, and Training.Search in Google Scholar

Giles, Howard & Patricia Johnson. 1987. Ethnolinguistic identity theory: A social psychological approach to language maintenance. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 68(1987). 69–99. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1987.68.69.Search in Google Scholar

Gluszek, Agata & John F. Dovidio. 2010a. Speaking with a nonnative accent: Perceptions of bias, communication difficulties, and belonging in the United States. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 29(2). 224–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x09359590.Search in Google Scholar

Gluszek, Agata & John F. Dovidio. 2010b. The way they speak: A social psychological perspective on the stigma of non-native accents in communication. Personality and Social Psychology Review 14(2). 214–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309359288.Search in Google Scholar

Hay, Jennifer, Aaron Nolan & Katie Drager. 2006a. From fush to feesh: Exemplar priming in speech perception. The Linguistic Review 23(3). 351–379. https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr.2006.014.Search in Google Scholar

Hay, Jennifer, Paul Warren & Katie Drager. 2006b. Factors influencing speech perception in the context of a merger-in-progress. Journal of Phonetics 34(4). 458–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.10.001.Search in Google Scholar

Holliday, Adrian. 2006. Native-speakerism. ELT Journal 60(4). 385–387. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccl030.Search in Google Scholar

Hu, Guiling & Stephanie Lindemann. 2009. Stereotypes of Cantonese English, apparent native/non-native status, and their effect on non-native English speakers’ perception. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 30(3). 253–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630802651677.Search in Google Scholar

Hu, Guiling & Jing Su. 2015. The effect of native/non-native information on non-native listeners’ comprehension. Language Awareness 24(3). 273–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2015.1077853.Search in Google Scholar

Huang, Becky H. 2013. The effects of accent familiarity and language teaching experience on raters’ judgments of non-native speech. System 41(3). 770–785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.07.009.Search in Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2003. World Englishes. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Kachru, Braj. 1986. The Alchemy of English: The spread, function, and models of nonnative Englishes. Chicago: University of Illinoi Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kang, Okim & Donald L. Rubin. 2009. Reverse linguistic stereotyping: Measuring the effect of listener expectations on speech evaluation. Journal of Language & Social Psychology 28(4). 441–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x09341950.Search in Google Scholar

Klem, Adena M. & James P. Connell. 2004. Relationships matter: Linking teacher support to student engagement and achievement. Journal of School Health 74(7). 262–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08283.x.Search in Google Scholar

Kroll, Barabara. 1977. Combining ideas in written and spoken English: A look at subordination and coordination. In Elinor O. Keenan & Tina L. Bennett (eds.), Discourse across time and space. Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguisticcs, No. 5. Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Bradford J. 2022. Enhancing listening comprehension through kinesthetic rhythm training. RELC Journal 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220941302.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Bradford J. & Justin L. Bailey (2020). Japanese tertiary-level students’ cognition of World Englishes. Memoirs of Fukui University of Technology 50. 243–253.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Bradford J. & Justin L. Bailey. 2021. Rural Japanese students’ sentiment regarding Japanese Teachers of English. In Peter Clements, Rick Derrah & Peter Ferguson (eds.), Communities of teachers & learners, 145–51. Tokyo: JALT.10.37546/JALTPCP2020-18Search in Google Scholar

Lambert, Craig, Jenefer Philp & Sachiko Nakamura. 2017. Learner-generated content and engagement in second language task performance. Language Teaching Research 21(6). 665–680. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816683559.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Bradford J. & Justin L. Bailey. 2022. Assumptions of speaker ethnicity and the effect on ratings of accentedness, comprehensibility, and intelligibility. Language Awareness, Submitted for publication.10.1080/09658416.2022.2091143Search in Google Scholar

Lev-Ari, Shiri & Boaz Keysar. 2010. Why don’t we believe non-native speakers? The influence of accent on credibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 46(6). 1093–1096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.025.Search in Google Scholar

Levis, John M. 2005. Changing contexts and shifting paradigms in pronunciation teaching. TESOL Quarterly 39(3). 369–377. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588485.Search in Google Scholar

Li, David Chor-Shing. 2009. Researching non-native speakers’ views toward intelligibility and identity: Bridging the gap between moral high grounds and down-to-earth concerns. In Farzad Sharifian (ed.), English as an international language: Perspectives and pedagogical issues. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847691231-008Search in Google Scholar

Lippi-Green, Rosina. 1997. English with an accent: Language, ideology, and discrimination in the United States. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Lum, Jarrad A. G., Martine Powell, Lydia Timms & Pamela Snow. 2015. A meta-analysis of cross sectional studies investigating language in maltreated children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 58(3). 961–976. https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_jslhr-l-14-0056.Search in Google Scholar

McGarrigle, Ronan, Kevin J. Munro, P. Dawes, Andrew J. Stewart, David R. Moore, Johanna G. Barry & Sygal Amitay. 2014. Listening effort and fatigue: What exactly are we measuring? A British society of Audiology Cognition in Hearing special Interest group ‘white paper’. International Journal of Audiology 53(7). 433–440. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992027.2014.890296.Search in Google Scholar

Miller, Jennifer. 2009. Teacher identity. In Anne Burns & Jack Richards (eds.), The Cambridge guide to second language teacher education, 172–181. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781139042710.023Search in Google Scholar

Miller, Earl K. & Jonathan D. Cohen. 2001. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex functioning. Annual Review of Neuroscience 24(1). 167–202. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167.Search in Google Scholar

Mosher, Ralph & Bradford MacGowan. 1985. Assessing student engagement in secondary schools: Alternative conceptions, strategies of assessing, and instruments. Madison: University of Wisconsin, Research and Development Center (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 272812).Search in Google Scholar

Munro, Murray J. & Tracey M. Derwing. 1995. Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning 45(1). 73–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00963.x.Search in Google Scholar

Munro, Murray J. & Tracey M. Derwing. 2011. The foundations of accent and intelligibility in pronunciation research. Language Teaching 44(3). 316–327. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444811000103.Search in Google Scholar

Nakamura, Sachiko, Linh Phung & Hayo Reinders. 2020. The effect of learner choice on L2 task engagement. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1017/s027226312000042x.Search in Google Scholar

Nelson, Charles. 1982. Intelligibility and non-native varieties of English. In Braj B. Kachru (ed.), The other tongue: English across cultures, 58–73. Urbana: University of Illinoi Press.Search in Google Scholar

Niedzielski, Nancy. 1999. The effect of social information on the perception of sociolinguistic variables. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 18(1). 62–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x99018001005.Search in Google Scholar

Oga-Baldwin, W. L. Quint & Yoshiyuki Nakata. 2017. Engagement, gender, and motivation: A predictive model for Japanese young language learners. System 65(April 2017). 151–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.01.011.Search in Google Scholar

Phillips, Michael D., Joseph T. Lurito, Mario Dzemidzic, Mark J. Lowe, Yang Wang & Vincent P. Mathews. 2000. Gender based differences in temporal lobe activation demonstrated using a novel passive listening paradigm. NeuroImage 11(5). S2352. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1053-8119(00)91283-7.Search in Google Scholar

Philp, Jenefer & Susan Duchesne. 2016. Exploring engagement in tasks in the language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 36. 50–72. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190515000094.Search in Google Scholar

Phung, Linh, Sachiko Nakamura & Hayo Reinders. 2020. The effect of choice on affective engagement: Implications for task design. In Phil Hiver, Ali H. Al-Hoorie & Sarah Mercer (eds.), Student engagement in the language classroom, 163–181. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Search in Google Scholar

Pichora-Fuller, M. Kathleen, Sophia E. Kramer, Mark A. Eckert, Brent Edwards, Benjamin W. Hornsby, Lemke E. Humes, Ulrike Lemke, Thomas Lunner, Mohan Matthen, Carol L. Mackersie, Graham Naylor, Natalie A. Phillips, Michael Richter, Mary Rudner, Mitchell S. Sommers, Kelly L. Tremblay & Arthur Wingfield. 2016. Hearing impairment and cognitive energy: The framework for understanding effortful listening (FUEL). Ear and Hearing 37. 5S–27S. https://doi.org/10.1097/aud.0000000000000312.Search in Google Scholar

Preacher, Kristopher J. & Andrew F. Hayes. 2004. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 36(4). 717–731. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03206553.Search in Google Scholar

Richards, Todd, Stephen Peverly, Amie Wolf, Robert Abbott, Steven Tanimoto, Rob Thompson, William Nagy & Virginia Berninger. 2016. Idea units in notes and summaries for read texts by keyboard and pencil in middle childhood students with specific learning disabilities: Cognitive and brain findings. Trends in Neuroscience and Education 5(3). 146–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2016.07.005.Search in Google Scholar

Rivers, Damian J. 2011. Intercultural processes in accented English. World Englishes 30(3). 375–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971x.2011.01707.x.Search in Google Scholar

Roberts, Ralph J. & Bruce F. Pennington. 1996. An integrative framework for examining prefrontal cognitive processes. Developmental Neuropsychology 12(1). 105–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565649609540642.Search in Google Scholar

Rubin, Donald L. 1992. Nonlanguage factors affecting undergraduates’ judgments of nonnative English-speaking teaching assistants. Research in Higher Education 33(4). 511–531. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00973770.Search in Google Scholar

Rubin, Donald L. 2002. Help! My professor (or doctor or boss) doesn’t talk English!. In Judith Martin, Thomas Nakayama & Lisa Flores (eds.), Readings in intercultural communication: Experiences and contexts, 127–137. Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.Search in Google Scholar

Rubin, Donald L. 2012. The power of prejudice in accent perception: Reverse linguistic stereotyping and its impact on listener judgments and decisions. In John Levis & Kimberly Levelle (eds.), Social factors in pronunciation acquisition: Proceedings of the 3rd pronunciation in second language learning and teaching conference, 11–18. Ames: Iowa State University.Search in Google Scholar

Russo, Marcello, Gazi Islam & Burak Koyuncu. 2017. Non-native accents and stigma: How self-fulfilling prophesies can affect career outcomes. Human Resource Management Review 27. 507–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.001.Search in Google Scholar

Sánchez-Hernández, Ariadna. 2018. A mixed-methods study of the impact of sociocultural adaptation on the development of pragmatic production. System 75(2018). 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.03.008.Search in Google Scholar

Saville-Troike, Muriel. 2017. Introducing second language acquisition, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316569832Search in Google Scholar

Skinner, Ellen A., Thomas A. Kindermann, James P. Connell & James G. Wellborn. 2009a. Engagement and disaffection as organizational constructs in the dynamics of motivational development. In Kathryn R. Wenzel & Allan Wigfield (eds.), Educational psychology handbook series. Handbook of motivation at school, 223–245. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Skinner, Ellen A., Thomas A. Kindermann & Carrie J. Furrer. 2009b. A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement 69(3). 493–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233.Search in Google Scholar

Smallwood, Jonathan & Jonathan W. Schooler. 2006. The restless mind. Psychological Bulletin 132(6). 946–958. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.6.946.Search in Google Scholar

Strand, Elizabeth A. 1999. Uncovering the role of gender stereotypes in speech perception. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 18(1). 86–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x99018001006.Search in Google Scholar

Svalberg, Agneta M.-L. 2009. Engagement with language: Interrogating the construct. Language Awareness 18(3–4). 242–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410903197264.Search in Google Scholar

Tajfel, Henri & John C. Turner. 1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In William G. Austin & Stephen Worchel (eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations, 33–47. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.Search in Google Scholar

Thomson, Ron I. 2018. Measurement of accentedness, intelligibility and comprehensibility. In Okim Kang & April Ginther (eds.), Assessment in second language pronunciation, 11–29. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315170756-2Search in Google Scholar

Tokumoto, Mina & Miki Shibata. 2011. Asian varieties of English: Attitudes towards pronunciation. World Englishes 30(3). 329–408. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971x.2011.01710.x.Search in Google Scholar

Trofimovich, Pavel, Kim McDonough, Phung Dao & Dato Abashidze. 2019. Attitudinal bias, individual differences, and second language speakers’ interactional performance. Applied Linguistics Review, AOP 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2019-0010.Search in Google Scholar

Tsalikis, John, Oscar W. Deshields & Michael S. Latour. 2013. The role of accent on the credibility and effectiveness of the salesperson. The Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management 11(1). 31–41.Search in Google Scholar

Unsworth, Nash & Matthew K. Robison. 2016. Pupillary correlates of lapses of sustained attention. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience 16(2016). 601–615. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-016-0417-4.Search in Google Scholar

van den Brink, Ruud L., Peter R. Murphy & Sander Nieuwenhuis. 2016. Pupil diameter tracks lapses of attention. PLoS ONE 11(10). e0165274. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165274.Search in Google Scholar

Vedder, Paul & Erkki Virta. 2005. Language, ethnic identity, and the adaptation of Turkish immigrant youth in the Netherlands and Sweden. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 29(3). 317–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.05.006.Search in Google Scholar

Winke, Paula & Susan Gass. 2016. Using free recall and idea units for evaluating second language comprehension: Methodological choices and issues. In TESOL Applied Linguistics Forum. Available at: http://newsmanager.commpartners.com/tesolalis/issues/2016-11-04/5.html.Search in Google Scholar

Wong, Ruth. 2018. Non-native EFL teachers’ perception of English accent in teaching and learning: Any preference? Theory and Practice in Language Studies 8(2). 177–183. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0802.01.Search in Google Scholar

Zekveld, Adriana A. & Sophia E. Kramer. 2014. Cognitive processing load across a wide range of listening conditions: Insights from pupillometry. Psychophysiology 51(2014). 277–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12151.Search in Google Scholar
Received: 2021-04-16
Accepted: 2022-02-13
Published Online: 2022-03-03
Published in Print: 2023-11-27

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Investigating the impact of task complexity on uptake and noticing of corrective feedback recasts
  4. Consequences of the comparative fallacy for the acquisition of grammatical aspect in Spanish
  5. Incorporating peer feedback in writing instruction: examining its effects on Chinese English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) learners’ writing performance
  6. Listener engagement: the missing link in research on accented speech
  7. Enhancing English spatial prepositions acquisition among Spanish learners of English as L2 through an embodied approach
  8. Lexical and grammatical collocations in beginning and intermediate L2 argumentative essays: a bigram study
  9. When concept-based language instruction meets cognitive linguistics: teaching English phrasal verbs with up and out
  10. Validation of a multiple-choice implicature test: insights from Chinese EFL learners’ cognitive processes
  11. A longitudinal study of topic continuity in Chinese EFL learners’ written narratives
  12. Miscommunicated referent tracking in L2 English: a case-by-case analysis
  13. Rule-based or efficiency-driven processing of expletive there in English as a foreign language
  14. When are performance-approach goals more adaptive for Chinese EFL learners? It depends on their underlying reasons
  15. Teaching L2 Spanish idioms with semantic motivation: should this be done proactively or retroactively?
  16. Role of individual differences in incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition through listening to stories: metacognitive awareness and motivation
  17. Measuring and profiling Chinese secondary school English teachers’ language mindsets: an exploratory study of non-native teachers’ perceived L2 proficiency loss
  18. The role of working memory in the effects of models as a written corrective strategy
  19. Comparing motivational features between feedback givers and receivers in English speaking class
  20. Examining resilience in EFL contexts: a survey study of university students in China
  21. High school EFL teachers’ oral corrective feedback beliefs and practices, and the effects of lesson focus
  22. L3 acquisition of aspect: the influence of structural similarity, analytic L2 and general L3 proficiency
https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2021-0177
Keywords for this article
accentedness; attention; comprehensibility; engagement; intelligibility

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Investigating the impact of task complexity on uptake and noticing of corrective feedback recasts
  4. Consequences of the comparative fallacy for the acquisition of grammatical aspect in Spanish
  5. Incorporating peer feedback in writing instruction: examining its effects on Chinese English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) learners’ writing performance
  6. Listener engagement: the missing link in research on accented speech
  7. Enhancing English spatial prepositions acquisition among Spanish learners of English as L2 through an embodied approach
  8. Lexical and grammatical collocations in beginning and intermediate L2 argumentative essays: a bigram study
  9. When concept-based language instruction meets cognitive linguistics: teaching English phrasal verbs with up and out
  10. Validation of a multiple-choice implicature test: insights from Chinese EFL learners’ cognitive processes
  11. A longitudinal study of topic continuity in Chinese EFL learners’ written narratives
  12. Miscommunicated referent tracking in L2 English: a case-by-case analysis
  13. Rule-based or efficiency-driven processing of expletive there in English as a foreign language
  14. When are performance-approach goals more adaptive for Chinese EFL learners? It depends on their underlying reasons
  15. Teaching L2 Spanish idioms with semantic motivation: should this be done proactively or retroactively?
  16. Role of individual differences in incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition through listening to stories: metacognitive awareness and motivation
  17. Measuring and profiling Chinese secondary school English teachers’ language mindsets: an exploratory study of non-native teachers’ perceived L2 proficiency loss
  18. The role of working memory in the effects of models as a written corrective strategy
  19. Comparing motivational features between feedback givers and receivers in English speaking class
  20. Examining resilience in EFL contexts: a survey study of university students in China
  21. High school EFL teachers’ oral corrective feedback beliefs and practices, and the effects of lesson focus
  22. L3 acquisition of aspect: the influence of structural similarity, analytic L2 and general L3 proficiency
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 20.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/iral-2021-0177/html
Scroll to top button