Complexity Perspectives on Researching Language Learner and Teacher Psychology. Группа авторов

      2

      Reflections on Researching Dynamics in Language Learning Psychology

      Peter D. MacIntyre, Sarah Mercer and Tammy Gregersen

      Introduction

      Humans are highly complex beings. Language and communication are complex systems. Combining psychology and language learning with the multifaceted communication process increases the complexity substantially. Add then to the mix the idea that all of these things are constantly changing over time and with even small differences in context, the challenge facing researchers in this field rounds into form. How does a research project capture such complexity and dynamism in a meaningful way without oversimplifying the lived reality? All three authors of this chapter have found taking a complexity-informed approach to research to be a most satisfying way of tackling this problem, but one that creates its share of challenges. In this chapter, we will reflect on our own experiences of grappling with the issues created by adopting a complexity perspective, focusing on timescales and dynamism. We will conclude this chapter with a series of recommendations, emerging from our experience, that we hope will assist other scholars wanting to research the dynamics of learner and/or teacher psychologies.

      A Gap between Theorizing and Empirical Research

      Within applied linguistics, theorizing complexity is well ahead of its empirical investigations (MacIntyre et al., 2017). Perhaps the reason for the imbalance between describing complex dynamic systems theory (CDST) and using it for empirical research is that CDST is itself meta-theoretical in nature, meaning that it is not a theory of language learning per se but an approach to creating theory (Larsen-Freeman, 2017); research does not test CDST directly. The ideas underlying CDST have been developed in several of the natural sciences, and now the social sciences and humanities including developmental psychology (Thelen & Smith, 1994) and communication (Fogel, 2006) have followed suit. In second language acquisition (SLA), CDST has attracted a collection of researchers interested in testing its applicability to various processes, many of whom are writing chapters in this volume and who have used it both as a theoretical lens as well as a basis for empirical design and analysis.

      SLA provides a rich context for understanding dynamics with its focus on language development, change and stability. However, it is not just language competences that are in a state of flux, but a range of related factors during these processes that are constantly interacting with learner and teacher psychologies. This makes the psychology of language learning an especially fertile ground for dynamic studies to take root. To date, research has tested the question of the applicability of CDST to familiar topics in this field such as willingness to communicate, motivation, the self, agency, anxiety, enjoyment, teacher efficacy and strategies; we discuss specific research examples. The studies we describe below unanimously conclude that the approach is well suited and the phenomena under study meet the key conditions for CDST. The work so far has indicated how a CDST perspective can lead to novel developments in conceptualization, methodology and data analysis/presentation; the possibilities for future research excite the imagination. The question now is how to proceed with research that will further our appreciation of the scope and potential of this theoretical framework to extend our understandings of the field of language learning and teaching.

      Benefits of a CDST Perspective on the Psychology of Language Learning

      Our interest in CDST is based in large part on what it offers as a way of thinking about the psychology of language learning (PLL) and communication and how CDST can contribute to new ways of studying the processes involved. The continuous interactions among the myriad of inter-personal and intra-personal processes are intricate, nuanced, contextualized and ever-changing. The focus on complex interactions requires a new set of tools for building theory and research.

      Before we consider the conceptual devices in the CDST toolbox that create the context for the approach, we must first establish what is being specified as a system. Defining a system is a matter of perspective; a lens that the researcher puts on a complex reality so that a system comes into focus as a functioning whole. The system remains open but its boundaries can be described. Discussions of CDST sometimes can become difficult to interpret if the system is not specified and this is an essential first step. Defining a system for study is a matter of emphasis, focussing on the most relevant processes. Not everything functions as a complex dynamic system and certain criteria must be fulfilled before a system can be defined (Mercer, 2016). To set the stage for the rest of the chapter and illustrate some of those characteristics, we highlight attributes of CDST that differ from other research approaches and make it especially relevant to PLL.

      Timescales

      Perhaps the most fundamental contribution of CDST is thinking explicitly about time and how it affects the processes under study. CDST forces a researcher to consider how a process unfolds over a chosen period of time. For example, in prior research, anxiety has typically been conceptualized as a long-term, trait-like quality of a learner, but in recent research it has been studied as rapidly changing from moment-to-moment, interacting with many of the features of communication events (MacIntyre, 2017). Both shorter and longer timescales have been used in prior research but they require very