Multidimensionality and Hierarchical Structure of the English Vocabulary Learning Attitude Scale
Tseng, Wen-Ta, Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal
The last three decades have seen researchers recognize and show growing concern about the importance of attitude when measuring the success of foreign language learning (Bartley, 1970; Briem, 1974; Chiachiere, 1993; Clement, Dornyei, & Noels, 1994; Corbin & Chiachiere, 1995; Gardner, 1985; Masgoret & Gardner, 2003). In numerous studies it has been shown that attitude toward foreign language learning is positively associated with foreign language proficiency and achievement (Coakley, 1985; Martinez, Aricak, & Jewell, 2008; Raymond & Roberts, 1983; Shaver, 1990). Raymond and Roberts (1983) found a moderate but positive relationship (r = .25) between foreign language attitude and college foreign language grades. Likewise, stronger associations were found for specific language skills such as reading (r = .43) and listening (r = .46; Raymond & Roberts). In a regression study, Martinez et al. (2008) also demonstrated that reading attitude significantly predicted reading achievement (3 = 0.22). Indeed, the aforementioned researchers have suggested that the role of attitude should not be neglected in the process of foreign language learning. Bartley (1970), in discussions of the importance of attitude, argued that "attitude toward learning is probably the most important factor in academic success" (p. 383).
Hence, a number of attempts have been made to develop reliable and valid instruments to measure learners' attitudes toward foreign language learning (Briem, 1974; Corbin & Chiachiere, 1995; Raymond & Roberts, 1983; Shaver, 1990). These early pioneering researchers, arguably, have contributed valuable insights into the way in which a language learning attitude scale should be established (e.g., Corbin & Chiachiere, 1995; Raymond & Roberts, 1983). For instance, Corbin and Chiachiere (1995) provided evidence for factorial validity of scores on Chiachiere's (1993) foreign language learning scale through exploratory factor analysis technique. Likewise, Raymond and Roberts demonstrated both discriminant and predictive validity of the intended scale through correlation and regression analyses. These early studies are, however, exploratory in nature and lack a priori theory to support the construct validity of the related attitude scales.
Most contemporary social psychologists tend to agree that attitude can be defined as one's overall evaluation of a stimulus object, albeit with some heterogeneity on the formal definition (Ajzen, 2005; Eagly & Chaiken, 1993). Attitude as reflected by its evaluative nature has often been theorized as either a multidimensional construct, consisting of cognition, affect, and conation (Ajzen, 2005; Bagozzi, 1978; Breckler, 1984; Eagly & Chaiken, 1993; Kothandapani, 1971; Ostrom, 1969; cf. Bagozzi & Burnkrant, 1979, 1985) or simply a onedimensional construct (Dillon & Kumar, 1985). A unidimensional perspective of attitude posits that there is no need to differentiate between any subtraits on the basis of evaluation of a stimulus object. By contrast, a multidimensional perspective of attitude suggests that a tripartite distinction can "help researchers evolve an understanding of the conditions under which attitudes truly have varying numbers of components" (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993, p. 14). According to Ajzen (2005), the cognitive component of attitude reflects beliefs of or thoughts about the attitude object; the affective component of attitude refers to feelings or emotions associated with a stimulus object; conation consists of behavioral inclinations, intentions, or commitments. On the prediction of the occurrence of behavior, researchers have found that the three components may have different effects. For instance, Bagozzi and Burnkrant (1979) found that the predictive power of the affective component ([beta] = .65) on religious behavior was approximately three times as forceful as the cognitive component ([beta] = .23). In other words, the occurrence of the religious behavior can be explained by the cognitive component for only 5% ([[beta].sup.2] = [.23.sup.2]) but by the affective component up to 42% ([[beta].sup.2] = [.65.sup.2]). Arguably, the gap is even wider in light of explanatory power.
Furthermore, Ajzen (2005) also points out that the construct of attitude is de facto a hierarchical model with "evaluative attitude at the highest level, cognition, affect, and conation at an intermediate level, and specific beliefs, feelings, and action …
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Article title: Multidimensionality and Hierarchical Structure of the English Vocabulary Learning Attitude Scale. Contributors: Tseng, Wen-Ta - Author. Journal title: Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal. Volume: 38. Issue: 7 Publication date: August 2010. Page number: 907+. © 2009 Scientific Journal Publishers, Ltd. COPYRIGHT 2010 Gale Group.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.