Ambiguity Tolerance and Field Independence as Predictors of Proficiency in English as a Second Language

Abstract

The fact that some adults are more successful at acquiring an L2 than others has led to investigations of individual characteristics as predictors of successful L2 acquisition. This paper reports the results ofan investigation of the relationship between two learner characteristics, Ambiguity Tolerance (AT) and Field Independence (FI), and adult learners' acquisition of English as a Second Language in the United States. A Multiple Regression Analysis revealed that AT and F1 accounted for a significant amount of variance on several end-of-semester language measures beyond that which could he accounted for by beginning-of-semester performance or other variables. The implications of these findings for further research are outlined. APTITUDE FOR SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITIONIn spite of attempts made to improve second language (L2) instruction, the fact remains that some adults are more successful at acquiring an L2 than others. In the past, researchers sought to explain this variance among 'This paper was presented at the 18th annual TESOL convention, March, 12-17, 1984 in Houston. Texas.

Field Dependence/Independence, Impulsivity/Reflectivity, Gender, and Cloze Test Performance of Iranian EFL Learners: A Study of Relations

“…Chapelle and Roberts (1986) found a significant correlation between field independence andcloze test performance in ESL students. In a similar study, Hansen and Stansfield (1981) found a positive relationship between field independence and scores on L2 tests, particularly in the case of the cloze tests.…”

Relevant Researches on Tolerance of Ambiguity

“…Another important related study is the one made by Chapelle & Roberts (1986). Employing Norton's MAT-50 (1975), a 61-item Likert type scale, as the measurement of tolerance of ambiguity, they put this scale into practical research for the first time.…”

Are Females Better Language Learners-From an Aspect of Multiple Intelligences and Ambiguity Tolerance

“…Some studies of ambiguity tolerance deal with the relationship between AT and ethnocentrism or authoritarianism (O'Conner, 1952;Levitt, 1953;Budner, 1962;Ehrlich, 1965;Chapelle, 1983); some refer to AT and learners' rigidity or receptivity of change (MacDonald, 1970;McLain, 1993); some mention about AT and other variables, such as Field Dependence/ Independence (Chapelle & Roberts, 1986), or strategy use (Ely, 1989); some focuse on AT and second/foreign language success (Pimsleur et al, 1966;Naiman, 1975;MacDonald,1970;Chapelle, 1983;Chapelle & Roberts, 1986;Chapelle & Jamison, 1986;Ely, 1986, Chen, 1989. Subjects of many studies are university students, with an exception in Levitt's (1953), in which subjects are elementary school students, and in Naiman et al's (1975), in which subjects are high school students.…”

“…They prefer memory or strategies which involve focusing on individual language elements (Ely, 1989), are more rigid (MacDonald,1970) and less inclined to take risks (Ely, 1995). They are easy to resort to black-and-white solutions (Frenkel-Brunswik,1949), have the tendencies to avoid ambiguous situations (Chapelle & Roberts, 1986), or even drop the subject (Naiman, et al,1975). On the contrary, people with more tolerance of ambiguity appreciate being in ambiguous situations.…”