International Journal of Bilingual Education and

Bilingualism

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rbeb20

Multilingual effects on EFL learning: a comparison

of foreign language anxiety and self-confidence
experienced by bilingual and multilingual tertiary
students

Elias Bensalem & Amy S. Thompson

To cite this article: Elias Bensalem & Amy S. Thompson (2021): Multilingual effects on EFL
learning: a comparison of foreign language anxiety and self-confidence experienced by bilingual
and multilingual tertiary students, International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, DOI:
10.1080/13670050.2021.1943306

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2021.1943306

Published online: 28 Jun 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 67

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rbeb20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM
https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2021.1943306

Multilingual effects on EFL learning: a comparison of foreign

language anxiety and self-confidence experienced by bilingual
and multilingual tertiary students
a b
Elias Bensalem and Amy S. Thompson
a
Northern Border University, Arar, Saudi Arabia; bWest Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The present project examined foreign language anxiety (FLA) and self- Received 19 September 2020
confidence experienced by bilingual and multilingual tertiary students Accepted 6 June 2021
in Saudi Arabia who were learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL).
KEYWORDS
The study involved 354 students (163 bilinguals and 191 multilinguals) Bilingualism; English as
recruited from public Saudi universities. Participants answered the foreign language; foreign
Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS; Horwitz, Horwitz, language anxiety;
and Cope 1986, “Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety.” The Modern multilingualism; positive
Language Journal 70 (2): 125–132). Results of an exploratory factor psychology; self-confidence
analysis (EFA) identified two dimensions underlying FLA: ‘English class
performance anxiety’ and ‘confidence with English’ Analyses of the data
revealed that the bilingual students experienced more FLA than their
multilingual peers; however, they also experienced more self-
confidence. The present study provides empirical evidence of the role
played by multilingualism in the Saudi context in terms of FLA and self-
confidence.

Introduction
Foreign language anxiety (FLA) is a very common phenomenon that is associated with foreign
language (FL) learning (Santos, Gorter, and Cenoz 2017, and it has been ‘the most widely studied
emotion in second language acquisition in the past four decades’ (MacIntyre 2017, 11). Foreign
language anxiety refers to learners’ ‘distress at their inability to be themselves and to connect auth-
entically with other people through the limitation of the new language’ (Horwitz 2017, 41). This form
of anxiety, which is triggered while learning a FL language (Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope 1986), is inde-
pendent from other types of anxiety that people experience in everyday life (Horwitz 2016). The
question that arises is whether bilinguals and multilinguals experience the same levels of anxiety
considering their different linguistic repertoires. Bilinguals who are in the process of learning their
first foreign language have different skills than multilinguals who have more experience in learning
more than one language (Thompson and Khawaja 2016); the seminal question for the current study
is whether bilinguals and multilinguals pattern in the same way with regards to their anxiety and self-
confidence profiles. Several studies have provided evidence for the positive effect of multilingualism
on reducing anxiety (e.g. Dewaele, Petrides, and Furnham 2008; Thompson and Khawaja 2016).
However, the potential dimensional differences of FLA that may be experienced by bilingual and
multilingual learners have been investigated only in the context of the Lao People’s Democratic
Republic (Lao PDR) (Phongsa, Mohamed Ismail, and Low 2017) and in Turkey (Thompson and
Khawaja 2016). Interestingly, recent work utilizing exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) on the

CONTACT Elias Bensalem bensalemelias@gmail.com

© 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 E. BENSALEM AND A. S. THOMPSON

Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS; Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope 1986) have found a
combination of positive and negative emotions in the resulting latent variable. For example, in
Thompson and Khawaja (2016) ‘Confidence with English’ was one of the emergent factors. Discuss-
ing the implications of both positive and negative emotions in individual difference research (MacIn-
tyre, Gregersen, and Mercer 2019) provides a more complete picture of the language learning
experience as a whole.
When examining any aspect of language learning, arguably particularly when affective variables
are involved, considering the context is an imperative part of the analysis (Mercer 2016). When dis-
cussing the language learning experiences of participants, examining how these experiences fit into
the micro and macro contexts inevitably leads to a more nuanced interpretation of the data (Holliday
1999). In Saudi Arabia, the context of the current study, Arabic is the dominant L1; English is the
second language of choice of the overwhelming majority. Other languages are spoken by immi-
grants, namely Rohingya and Swahili (Ethnologue 2019). As these languages, and others, are
spoken primarily by expatriate workers who come from more different countries, learning these
languages are not a priority for many Saudi citizens. Nonetheless, according to Article 50 of the Edu-
cational Policy in Saudi Arabia, students should learn at least one foreign language for communi-
cation with expatriates and ethnic groups that reside in the Kingdom (Al-Seghayer 2013).
Despite the great importance of English in achieving academic success, students’ performance
has been unsatisfactory (Tanielian 2017). In fact, Saudi students’ proficiency decreased on the
English First (EF) index (EF 2018). Some scholars attribute this decline in English proficiency to the
EFL teachers’ lack of qualifications (Al-Hazmi 2003). Other scholars argue that affective factors
such as anxiety could have contributed to the poor performance of Saudi EFL students (Tanielian
2017). The current study is motivated by the need to further explore dimensional differences experi-
enced by bilingual and multilingual learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) in order to dis-
close the relationships between FLA and self-confidence in conjunction with multilingual status in
the underexplored context of Saudi Arabia.

Literature review
Overview of language learning anxiety
MacIntyre and Gardner (1994) defined the construct of FLA as ‘the feeling of tension and apprehen-
sion specifically associated with second language contexts including speaking, listening, and learn-
ing’ (p.284). Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope (1986) defined FLA as ‘a distinct complex of self-perceptions,
beliefs, feelings, and behaviors related to classroom language learning arising from the uniqueness
of the language learning process’ (128). MacIntyre (2017, 23) has argued that anxiety should no
longer be perceived as a stable and independent construct. Instead, he has proposed a ‘Dynamic
Approach’ of anxiety, which puts emphasis on anxiety as a construct that is continuously interacting
with a number of other learner, situational, and other factors including linguistic abilities, physiologi-
cal reactions, self-related appraisals, pragmatics, interpersonal relationships, specific topics being
discussed, type of setting in which people are interacting, and so on. This multitude of factors,
which are often language specific, have an impact on language learning (Dewaele and Dewaele
2017).

Overview of positive psychology

In the past decade, we have witnessed a major shift from a sole focus on negative emotions, such as
anxiety, to considering the role of positive emotions in language learning. Fredrickson (2009) has
outlined ten of the most commonly experienced positive emotions, including joy, gratitude, serenity,
interest, hope, pride, amusement, inspiration, awe, and love. Positive emotions were found to be
most strongly linked to attitudes towards the learning environment, attitudes towards the instructor
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 3

and the course, desire to learn the target language, and attitudes towards learning the target
language (MacIntyre, Gregersen, and Mercer 2019). Positive emotions contribute to learners’ well-
being (MacIntyre, Gregersen, and Mercer 2019). They are believed to play a role in increasing stu-
dents’ motivation, enhancing language learning process (MacIntyre and Gregersen 2012), and
develop resilience, which is necessary to alleviate the crippling effects of negative emotions
(Dewaele et al. 2018; MacIntyre, Gregersen, and Mercer 2019).
Since the rise of the positive psychology movement, and since the publication of Dewaele and
MacIntyre (2016), enjoyment has received much attention in the individual differences literature.
Several studies reported that enjoyment was of the most frequently experienced positive emotions
(Pavelescu and Petrić 2018). However, other emotions such as self-confidence should also be con-
sidered in relation to FLA. In fact, a certain degree of self-confidence is one of the conditions for
acquiring the ability to communicate in a foreign language (Brown 1994). Self-confidence signifi-
cantly contributes to the learner’s willingness to communicate in a foreign language (MacIntyre
et al. 1998). The relevance of examining FLA in relation to self-confidence was inspired by MacIntyre
et al. (1998) study which proposed self-confidence as a central concept of their model of willingness
to communicate (WTC). The model identifies the impact of a number of linguistic, communicative,
and social psychological variables affect learners’ willingness to communicate. MacIntyre et al.
(1998) focused on the way perceived competence and anxiety affect WTC separately unlike
Clément (1986) who considered self-confidence as a higher order construct comprising anxiety
and self-evaluation of proficiency.
Although earlier studies using the FLCAS focused on the term ‘anxiety,’ by examining the latent
variables found in EFAs in more recent studies using the FLCAS, evidence of positive psychology is
present. Details of this is found in the subsequent sections.

Affective variables and multilingualism

The complexity of FLA stems from the fact that it is related to many variables (Santos, Gorter, and
Cenoz 2017), including multilingualism. In this study, the term multilingualism refers to ‘any experi-
ence with a third language’ (Thompson and Khawaja 2016, 1). Many studies demonstrated the cor-
relation between knowledge of additional languages and FLA. In other words, multilingualism
helped foreign language learners reduce their FLA levels. Kemp (2001) avers that students’ knowl-
edge of more than two languages helps them develop better learning strategies, and thus improves
their language proficiency. Consequently, they tend to experience lower levels of FLA. Empirical
studies have demonstrated that multilinguals tend to experience lower levels of FLA than their
monolingual peers (Cenoz 2013; Dewaele 2007; Dewaele, Petrides, and Furnham 2008; Santos,
Cenoz, and Gorter 2015; Thompson and Lee 2013; Thompson and Khawaja 2016). In one of the
major studies on FLA and multilingualism, Dewaele (2007) reported that trilinguals and quadrilin-
guals had lower levels of FLA in their second language than bilinguals. However, when using
their third language, they showed the same levels of anxiety. The researcher concluded that ‘trilin-
guals and quadrilinguals have become better communicators as a result of their multilingualism and
that their self-confidence, as well as their self-perceived competence, has grown as a result’ (404).
Evidence for the correlation between multilingualism and reduced levels of anxiety was provided
by more recent studies. For example, Thompson and Khawaja (2016) found in the Turkish context
that the multilingual participants indicated higher levels of self-confidence and lower levels of
anxiety than did their bilingual counterparts. In a different context, Phongsa, Mohamed Ismail,
and Low (2017) examined affective variables through the profiles of bilingual and multilingual EFL
students in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. It should be noted that participants who spoke
Lao as their native language and were learning English as a second language were considered mono-
linguals by the authors, although we refer to them as bilinguals for consistency in terminology. Lear-
ners who learnt Lao as a second language and were learning EFL as a third language were classified
as bilinguals; similarly, we refer to them as multilinguals, as they have three languages in their
4 E. BENSALEM AND A. S. THOMPSON

repertoire. Results showed that ‘the bilingual group of EFL learners [i.e. the multilinguals] in this
study did not face increased foreign language anxiety despite learning English as the third language
(L3)’ (278). However, a few studies have reported that variables such as learning additional languages
later in life (Dewaele 2007; Dewaele, Petrides, and Furnham 2008) and lower language proficiency
(Santos, Gorter, and Cenoz 2017) are linked to communicative anxiety. In his study involving adult
multilingual learners, Dewaele (2007) reported that languages acquired later in life triggered
higher levels of anxiety. The author attributed this outcome to the fact that languages learnt
earlier in life are used more frequently and proficiency levels tend to be higher. The same
findings are corroborated by Dewaele, Petrides, and Furnham (2008) who concluded that languages
learnt later in life were linked with higher levels of anxiety.
In a more recent study conducted in the Basque region of Spain, Santos, Gorter, and Cenoz (2017)
found that native speakers of Spanish and native speakers of Basque exhibited more FLA in English
as a third language than in their second language (Basque or Spanish) even though they started
learning English at a relatively young age of around six. The authors attributed this result to the
lack of exposure to English in the Basque community. They argued that ‘there are few opportunities
to use English outside the classroom and watching television in the original version in English is not
widespread. Therefore, the competence level in the Basque Autonomous Community is quite low
compared to other European countries’ (24).

Affective variables and bilingual and multilingual participants

In the literature related to anxiety, several studies that have identified FLA as a construct link it to
three factors, namely communication apprehension, test anxiety, and fear of negative evaluation.
However, Horwitz (2016) qualified dividing FLA into three elements as an over-generalized interpret-
ation (see also Thompson and Lee 2013). Meanwhile, more recent research has identified different
constructs of FLA in different linguistic settings ranging from two to nine factors (e.g. Park 2014;
Thompson and Khawaja 2016; Tum 2015).
Most of the research conducted on FLA and multilingualism (e.g. Thompson and Lee 2013;
Phongsa, Mohamed Ismail, and Low 2017; Thompson and Sylvén 2015; Thompson and Khawaja
2016) used the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) developed by Horwitz (1986)
in order to explore dimensions related to FLA, which also includes variables in line with positive psy-
chology. Despite the fact that these studies were carried out in different educational and linguistic
contexts, at least three dimensions revealed by each study are similar: related to class performance
anxiety (negative emotion), self-confidence in English (positive emotion), and fear/tolerance of ambi-
guity (negative or positive emotion, depending on the framing). Class performance anxiety is related
to anxiety provoked by the fear of not doing well in class, and the pressure to not lost in the eyes of
the teacher and classmates. Self-confidence in English has to do with the learner’s self-perceived
ability to communicate in English including interaction with native speakers as well as confidence
in taking exams. The third shared dimension, labeled ‘fear of ambiguity’ was first identified by
Thompson and Lee (2013) before it became a recurring dimension in subsequent studies. Fear of
ambiguity is the distress that occurs on the part of the student when they feel they might not under-
stand what is being said or corrected in the class. The feeling of getting overwhelmed by the number
of rules the student has to learn to speak English can also cause fear of ambiguity (Thompson and
Sylvén 2015; Thompson and Khawaja 2016; Thompson and Lee 2013).
While dimensions underlying FLA have been explored in previous research, few studies have
explored the potential differences in dimensions experienced by bilinguals and multilinguals.
Thompson and Khawaja (2016) compared FLCAS factor scores achieved by an EFA in the Turkish
context with bilingual (n = 64) and multilingual (n = 92) speakers. The results indicate that multilin-
guals outperform bilinguals in the area of positive psychology (self-confidence), whereas bilinguals
exhibit more anxiety, fear of ambiguity, and negative attitudes towards English. It is important to
note that the additional language (French, German, etc.) seemed to interact with affective variables
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 5

in English; in other words, studying more than one additional language had a relationship with
English language outcomes.
Similarly, Phongsa, Mohamed Ismail, and Low (2017) compared FLA experienced by EFL students
who were bilingual Lao language speakers (n = 206, Lao + English) and multilingual Lao language
speakers (n = 34, Lao + English + a minority language, such as Hmong, Kmu, or others) in the Lao
People’s Democratic Republic. Results showed multilingual students were more comfortable inter-
acting with native speakers of English and had higher levels of self-confidence in using English com-
pared with their bilingual peers. Both groups had the same level of self-rated English proficiency,
frequency of using English at school, and frequency of practicing English with native speakers.
The authors suggested that multilingualism has a positive impact on self-confidence in using the
target language, and could help reduce levels of FLA. However, these outcomes should be taken
with caution since only 14.2% of the participants were multilingual. A more balanced sample of bilin-
gual and multilingual participants may have yielded different outcomes. The current study sets out
to overcome this limitation by examining dimensional differences among a balanced group of bilin-
gual and multilingual EFL Saudi students.

The context of the current study: Saudi Arabia

As discussed in the introduction, English enjoys the status of being the only foreign language taught
in Saudi Arabian public schools at the primary, intermediate, and secondary levels (Mahboob and
Elyas 2014). Most universities in Saudi Arabia use English a medium of instruction for engineering,
medical, and scientific courses (Tanielian 2017) while Arabic is used as a medium of instruction
for humanities courses. Despite the huge investment of the Saudi government in English language
teaching, students’ performance has been below expectations (Tanielian 2017) as students’ profi-
ciency has witnessed a decrease on the English First (EF) index (EF 2018). In 2018, Saudi Arabia
ranked sixth to last among 88 nations surveyed, ahead of countries such as Iraq and Libya (EF
2018). Some scholars attribute this decline in English proficiency to the Saudi EFL teachers who
lack qualifications to help students become good English learners (Al-Hazmi 2003). In fact, Saudi
EFL teachers are not adequately trained some do not even have a sufficient level of English profi-
ciency to even understand the materials they are supposed to deliver to students (Al-Seghayer
2013). Some scholars argue that the poor performance of Saudi EFL students could be related to
affective factors namely anxiety (Tanielian 2017).
Several scholars (e.g. Al-Saraj 2013, 2014; Hamouda 2013) have examined the construct of FLA in
the Saudi EFL context. Findings show that Saudi male and female students reported moderate to
high levels of FLA (Bensalem 2019; Bensalem 2021). Sources of anxiety are both internal and external.
Internal factors include low level of proficiency in English (Dewaele and Alfawzan 2018; Dewaele and
Al-Saraj 2015). External factors include the nature of relationship between students and teachers
such as teachers’ habits of belittling students and not recognizing their efforts (Dewaele and Alfaw-
zan 2018), which were reported major sources of anxiety. Saudi learners have reported that their
instructors adopted bad pedagogical practices, which negatively impacted their emotional well-
being (Dewaele and Alfawzan 2018). The bulk of studies on anxiety in the Saudi context focused
mainly on bilingual learners. The impact of multilingualism has not been examined yet probably
because most Saudi students are bilinguals with Arabic as a native language and English as the
second language; knowledge of additional languages is not as common as it is in other more linguis-
tically diverse countries. As such, this study fills a gap in the current research by examining multilin-
gual Saudi students, an understudied population.

The current study

The aim of this study was to explore affective variables experienced by bilingual and multilingual EFL
learners using factors generated from the FLCAS. While some studies reported a positive role of
6 E. BENSALEM AND A. S. THOMPSON

multilingualism in reducing FLA and increasing self-confidence, very little research was conducted
on the potential dimensional differences of FLA and self-confidence that may be experienced by
bilingual and multilingual learners. This study fills a gap in the SLA research since there is a
dearth of research on the anxiety profiles of EFL bilingual and multilingual students among Arab stu-
dents in the Gulf region. It also adds to the small body of available literature on FLA among multi-
linguals in the Saudi context.
The following research questions are addressed:

(1) What are the underlying dimensions of the FLCAS when used with bilingual and multilingual
Saudi EFL learners?
(2) How do bilingual and multilingual Saudi EFL learners experience the dimensions of the FLCAS
similarly and/or differently?
(3) Are there significant interactions between bi-/multilingual status and the underlying dimensions
of the FLCAS with this group of Saudi learners?

Method
Context and participants
English is the dominant second language studied in the Saudi context. The first two foreign
languages introduced to secondary education were English and French in 1958. However, in 1969
the Saudi Ministry of Education decided to offer French courses to grades only 10–12 (Al-Abdulkader,
1978). Later, French was offered only in some private schools. This decision paved the way for English
to become the only foreign language taught in Saudi public schools, and presently, English is a core
subject in all schools (Mahboob and Elyas 2014) and is taught in all universities as an elective subject,
or as part of major requirements. In this context, all students are required to take at least an intro-
ductory English course, and English is the medium of instruction to teach many non-humanities sub-
jects such as engineering, science, and medicine (Tanielian 2017). Saudi students are aware of the
need to develop a certain level of proficiency in English, as it is a requirement to secure certain
private sector jobs such as in commerce, industry, hospitals, and hotels. Job seekers who do not
have adequate proficiency in English may not be able to secure decent or coveted jobs (Al-Seghayer
2013). In the current study, a total of 354 students (163 bilingual and 191 multilingual learners) from
lower intermediate, intermediate, upper intermediate, and advanced courses of general English
classes segregated by gender (per country education policy) at several universities in Saudi Arabia
participated in the study. Given the limited number of multilingual students in Saudi universities,
the researcher recruited available participants from different course levels. Table 1 provides basic
information about the participants. Their ages ranged from 18 to 38 years (M = 21.26, SD = 2.25). A
total of 198 (56%) of the participants were male and 163 (44%) were female. Multilinguals are par-
ticipants who learned French (L3), along with English (L2), and Arabic (L1). The overwhelming
majority of multilinguals had an elementary level of French since they took two courses at
college, the only language other than English offered in this context. Bilinguals refer to participants
who learned English as an L2. Students in Saudi Arabia typically start learning English in elementary

Table 1. Summary of participants’ characteristics.

Variable Category Frequency Percent
Gender Female 163 44
Male 198 56
Year in college Freshman (first year) 53 15.0
Sophomore (second year) 89 25.1
Junior (third year) 113 31.9
Senior (fourth year) 99 28.0
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 7

Table 2. English self-perceived proficiency levels.

Bilinguals n = 163) Multilinguals (n = 191)
M SD M SD
Speaking (max = 10) 5.07 2.13 5.77 2.21
Listening (max = 10) 5.70 2.40 6.41 2.31
Reading (max = 10) 6.33 2.41 6.38 2.21
Writing (max = 10) 5.37 2.41 5.93 2.10
Total score (max = 40) 22.47 24.49

school (grade 4 through grade 6) when they are 10 years old (Alrashidi and Phan 2015) with classes
twice a week. In junior high and high school students take four 45-minute classes per week. Prior to
admission to any academic program, students are required to enroll in an intensive one semester
preparatory English program with 15 hours of class per week. Upon the completion of the
program, students should have at least an intermediate level of proficiency in English. The over-
whelming majority of multilinguals had an elementary level of French, having taken two courses
(2 credit hours each) at college, the only language other than English offered in this context. In
Table 2, participants self-rated their proficiency in English on a scale from 1 to 10 for listening, speak-
ing, reading and writing are reported. Self-rating proficiency has been used in several previous
studies (i.e. Dewaele 2010; Dewaele and Stavans 2014; Santos, Cenoz, and Gorter 2015; Thompson
and Lee 2013). A detailed rationale for using self-rated proficiency scales in low stakes situations
is found in Thompson and Lee (2013).
The four sub-scores for each participant were summed for the analysis for a total English profi-
ciency score. To verify that the scores could be treated equally, an EFA was run on the sub-scores
(Maximum Likelihood, direct oblimin rotation, KMO = .796). All four skills loaded onto one factor
(eigenvalues > 1), indicating that they are all part of the same latent variable and can be analyzed
together.

Instruments
Background questionnaire
This questionnaire was designed to elicit participants’ background information related to their age,
gender, year of study, and whether they were bilingual or multilingual. It included self-ratings of
proficiency in four skills of the English language: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Partici-
pants were instructed to rate their proficiency in English on a scale from 1 to 10 for each skill. A
similar scale was used in previous studies (Santos, Cenoz, and Gorter 2015; Thompson and Lee 2013).

Anxiety scale
The FLCAS is a self-reported measure of learners’ anxiety in the foreign language classroom designed
by Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope (1986). This widely used scale consists of 33 statements. The state-
ments were used to determine participants’ anxiety levels and were based on five-point Likert
scales (1= strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neutral, 4 = disagree, 5 = strongly disagree). An adapted
Arabic version of the FLCAS for the EFL context was used to measure anxiety levels among partici-
pants (e.g. Bensalem 2019, 2021). In order to ensure the validity of the Arabic version of the ques-
tionnaire, the translation, back-translation method was used by competent users of Arabic. One
professor of translation translated the survey into Arabic, and then a second professor back trans-
lated the Arabic version to English. One of the authors of this study checked the back translation
against the original English to make sure that the meaning of each survey item remained intact.
Results of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for Factor 1 and Factor 2 are respectively .91 and .77. The
survey measure was pilot tested prior to the onset of the study with a small group of students
who had the same profile of the study participants. The aim of the pilot of study was to check
that all survey items were clear.
8 E. BENSALEM AND A. S. THOMPSON

Procedure
Data were collected by means of a questionnaire that was posted online using Googledocs. After
getting approval from the Ethics Committee in the target institutions, participants who gave their
consent to participate were briefed about the purpose of the study. They were assured of the confi-
dentiality of all their background information. Participants had the option to choose between Arabic
and English as the survey language; the decision to include an Arabic version was due to the fact that
some of the participants felt more comfortable responding to surveys in Arabic and that including a
language option would increase the participation rate. The survey took between 10 and 15 minutes
to complete and was anonymous.

Results
Underlying dimensions of FLA
In order to explore the underlying dimensions of FLA, a direct oblimin rotated maximum likelihood
analysis was carried out. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (χ 2 [528] = 4477.89, p < 0.001),
indicating that it was appropriate to use the factor analytic model on this set of data. The Kaiser-
Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy indicated that the strength of the relationships
among variables was high (KMO = .86), thus the data was suited for factor analysis (i.e. the
number of participants relative to the number of items was appropriate; also see Field (2013) for
an overview of the numerical parameters for running an EFA). Only items that loaded onto a
factor with a value of 0.4 or higher were included in order to increase the rate of convergence. There-
fore, seven items were deleted from the analysis (Items 5: It would bother me to take more English
classes; Item 6: During English class, I find myself thinking about things that have nothing to do with
the course; Item 17: I often feel like not going to my English class; Item 21: The more I study for an
English test, the more confused I get; Item 24: I feel very self-conscious about speaking English in
front of other students; Item 25: English class moves so quickly I worry about getting left behind;
Item 30: I feel overwhelmed by the number of rules you have to learn to speak English). After these
items were deleted, the EFA was run again. Based on the scree plot (see Figure 1) and the interpret-
ability of the factor solution, a 26-item, two-dimension solution was found.
The pattern matrix in Table 3 revealed Dimension 1 identified as ‘class performance anxiety.’ It
was a robust factor made up of 18 items, with a high eigenvalue of 7.17, and it accounted for
27.56% of the variance in the data. The second dimension was labeled ‘self-confidence with
English’ and consisted of 8 items. It had an eigenvalue of 3.24 and accounted for a further 12.47%
of the variance. Descriptive statistics of anxiety items’ dimensions are reported in Table 4.

Differences in the dimensions of FLA

Two univariate ANOVA analyses were conducted to examine the differences between the bilingual
and multilingual students (independent, or group, variable for both analyses) in terms of anxiety and
self-confidence (dependent variables). As shown in Table 5, the results indicated that the two groups
(bilinguals and multilinguals) differed significantly in both Factor 1: anxiety and Factor 2: self-confi-
dence. For Factor 1, the bilingual group (M = 2.80) reported higher levels of anxiety related to English
class performance anxiety than the multilingual group (M = 2.61). The univariate ANOVA yielded a
statistically significant effect, F(1, 352) = 4 .67, p = .031, η 2 = .013. Interestingly, for Dimension 2,
the bilingual group (M = 3.26) also reported a higher level of self-confidence than their multilingual
peers (M = 2.98). The univariate ANOVA yielded a statistically significant effect, F(1, 352) = 10 .08, p
= .002, η 2 = .002.
For RQ3, as the participants also reported perceived proficiency data, a factorial ANOVA for
each latent variable was run to investigate whether or not there was evidence of an interaction
between perceived proficiency in English and bi-/multilingual status. A 2 × 2 factorial ANOVA
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 9

Figure 1. Scree Plot for the Exploratory Factor Analysis plot.

Table 3. FLCAS factor analysis with Oblimin Rotation (N = 354).

Items English class performance Anxiety Self-confidence in English h²
Cronbach’s alpha .91 .77
FLCAS 31 .706 .511
FLCAS 20 .699 .489
FLCAS 7 .677 .465
FLCAS 27 .674 .459
FLCAS 33 .649 .427
FLCAS 4 .651 .439
FLCAS 23 .641 .411
FLCAS 26 .619 .414
FLCAS 12 .626 .409
FLCAS 3 .605 .366
FLCAS 19 .581 .338
FLCAS 1 .539 .293
FLCAS 13 .522 .272
FLCAS 9 .516 .267
FLCAS 29 .509 .268
FLCAS 16 .501 .255
FLCAS 15 .500 .338
FLCAS 10 .437 .193
FLCAS 28 .656 .493
FLCAS 18 .630 .418
FLCAS 32 .593 .354
FLCAS 14 .552 .317
FLCAS 8 .546 .314
FLCAS 11 .471 .229
FLCAS 22 .466 .236
FLCAS 2 .413 .172
Eigenvalue 7.17 3.24
% Variance 27.56 12.47
10 E. BENSALEM AND A. S. THOMPSON

Table 4. Descriptive statistics of dimensions for bilinguals and multilinguals.

Bilinguals
Multilinguals
Dimension 1: Class anxiety Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I speak in English. (Item 31) 2.65 1.30 2.28 1.27
I can feel my heart pounding when I am going to be called on in English class. (Item 20) 2.80 1.18 2.53 1.29
I keep thinking that the other students are better at English than I am. (Item 7) 2.67 1.15 2.52 1.28
I get nervous and confused when I am speaking in my English class. (Item 27) 2.76 1.23 2.39 1.28
I get nervous when the English teacher asks questions which I haven’t prepared for in advance. 3.04 1.24 3.04 1.36
(Item 33)
It frightens me when I don’t understand what the teacher is saying in English class. (Item 4) 2.80 1.25 2.85 1.45
I always feel that the other students speak English better than I do. (Item 23) 2.74 1.18 2.58 1.18
I feel more tense and nervous in my English class than in my other classes. (Item 26) 2.42 1.22 2.11 1.11
In English class, I can get so nervous when I forget things I know. (Item 12) 3.18 1.29 2.92 1.43
I tremble when I know that I am going to be called on in English class. (Item 3) 2.61 1.23 2.49 1.29
I am afraid that my English teacher is ready to correct every mistake I make. (Item 19) 2.75 1.22 2.46 1.29
I am never quite sure of myself when I am speaking in my English class. (Item 1) 2.79 1.23 2.62 1.29
It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my English class. (Item 13) 2.94 1.23 2.48 1.17
I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation in English class. (Item 9) 3.03 1.28 2.85 1.36
I get nervous when I don’t understand every word the English teacher says. (Item 29) 3.01 1.26 2.79 1.34
Even if I am well prepared for English class, I feel anxious about it. (Item 16) 2.39 1.05 2.33 1.20
I get upset when I don’t understand what the teacher is correcting. (Item 15) 3.15 1.29 2.93 1.37
I worry about the consequences of failing my English class. (Item 10) 2.63 1.39 2.91 1.53
Dimension 2: Self-confidence in English
When I am on my way to English class, I feel very sure and relaxed. (Item 28) 3.38 1.10 3.31 1.33
I feel confident when I speak in English class. (Item 18) 3.25 1.23 3.10 1.37
I would probably feel comfortable around native speakers of English. (Item 32) 3.23 1.17 3.28 1.44
I would not be nervous speaking English with native speakers. (Item 14) 3.33 1.22 2.99 1.45
I am usually at ease during tests in my English class. (Item 8) 2.95 1.19 2.55 1.32
I don’t understand why some people get so upset over English classes. (Item 11) 3.12 1.15 2.95 1.41
I don’t feel pressured to prepare very well for English class. (Item 22) 3.66 1.15 2.92 1.45
I don’t worry about making mistakes in English class. (Item 2) 3.10 1.23 2.78 1.45

Table 5. Means Standard Deviations, and ANOVA Analysis of Variance in Dimensions.

Bilinguals Multilinguals F(2,352) p-value η2
Factor M SD M SD
Anxiety 2.80 .81 2.61 .77 4.67 .031 .013
Self-confidence 3.26 .71 2.98 .87 10.08 .002 .002

examining the effects of bi-/multilingual status and high/low English proficiency on level of class
anxiety indicated a significant main effect for English proficiency: F (1, 350) = 71.16, p < .001. The
effect size (partial η2 = .169) is large. The R2 value of .181 shows that this factor accounts for =
18.1% of the variance. Students with high English proficiency (M = 2.35, SD = 0.643) had signifi-
cantly lower class anxiety than did those with lower English proficiency (M = 3.01, SD = 0.786).
With a main effect for bi-/multilingual status approaching significance (F [1, 350] = 3.22, p
= .073), bilingual students (no French study, M = 2.80, SD = .811) indicated more class anxiety
than the multilingual students (with French study, M = 2.62, SD = .770). Finally, no significant inter-
action effect was found for English proficiency and bi-/multilingual status: F (1, 350) = 0.85, p
= .356. (Table 6).

Table 6. Factorial ANOVA results for class anxiety

Df F Partial η2 p Power
1. (A) Bilingual/multilingual 1 3.22 .009 .073 .433
1. (B) High/low level of English proficiency 1 71.16 .169 .000 1.00
(AB) Interaction 1 .85 .002 .356 .152
Error (within groups) 350
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 11

Table 7. Factorial ANOVA results for self-confidence.

Df F Partial η2 p Power
1. (A) Bilingual/multilingual 1 10.06 .028 .002 .885
1. (B) High/low level of English proficiency 1 .01 .000 .919 .051
(AB) Interaction 1 1.31 .004 .253 .207
Error (within groups) 350

A 2 × 2 factorial ANOVA examining the effects of bi-/multilingual status and high/low English
proficiency on level of self-confidence indicated a significant main effect for bi-/multilingual
status: F (1, 350) = 10.06, p = .002). The effect size (partial η2 = .028) falls in the small/medium
range. The R2 value of .031 shows that this factor accounts for = 3.1% of the variance. Multilingual
students (M = 2.99, SD = 0.870) had significantly lower self-confidence than did those bilingual stu-
dents (M = 3.26, SD = 0.713). There was no main effect for English proficiency on level of self-confi-
dence. Finally, no significant interaction effect was found for English proficiency and bi-/
multilingual status: F (1, 350) = 1.309, p = .253 (Table 7).

Discussion
The first research question examines the underlying dimensions of the FLCAS when used in the Saudi
EFL context with bilingual and multilingual university students. The EFA identified two dimensions:
‘English class performance anxiety’ and ‘confidence with English.’ As expected, English class perform-
ance anxiety was the most prominent dimension in this study. It accounted for 25.41% of the var-
iance in the data and included 14 items. The same dimension was identified by previous studies
(Thompson and Lee 2013; Phongsa, Mohamed Ismail, and Low 2017; Thompson and Sylvén 2015;
Thompson and Khawaja 2016). This outcome provides further evidence that English class perform-
ance anxiety is a prominent emotion regardless of the linguistic or educational background of
learners.
Confidence with English was the second dimension identified in this study. It consisted of 8 items
and accounted for 12.47% of the variance of the variance. Confidence with English was also ident-
ified in previous studies (Phongsa, Mohamed Ismail, and Low 2017; Thompson and Khawaja 2016).
Considering the evidence found in several studies regarding the emergence of the latent variable
found in the FLCAS, this instrument clearly measures both positive and negative emotions. As
more researchers are rightfully considering the interactions of positive emotions and language learn-
ing, understanding the validated instruments that are available for these constructs helps to advance
the positive psychology agenda. The items in the FLCAS are clearly written to measure both positive
and negative emotions. Items such as 31, I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I
speak in English, measure anxiety whereas items such as 28, When I am on my way to English class, I
feel very sure and relaxed, measure emotions on the positive spectrum. For years, researchers have
used the FLCAS to not only measure anxiety, but to specifically examine what was widely perceived
to be the three underlying constructs of the FLCAS: communication apprehension, fear of negative
evaluation, and test anxiety. As was cited in Thompson and Lee (2013, 731), Horwitz never intended
for the FLCAS to be limited to those specific three latent variables. Through systematic EFA data
explorations in a variety of contexts, we can now say with a degree of certainly that the FLCAS
goes beyond measuring anxiety. When the FLCAS items are taken at face value (i.e. not reverse
coding the positively worded items to change those data to represent negative emotions), the
FLCAS is also a pertinent measure of the positive emotion of self-confidence.
The second research question examines the significant differences in the dimensions of FLA
exhibited by both bilingual and multilingual Saudi EFL learners. The results reveal that bilingual stu-
dents experienced higher levels of anxiety related to English class performance, but surprisingly, also
showed higher levels of self-confidence in English than did the multilingual students. One possible
12 E. BENSALEM AND A. S. THOMPSON

explanation for lower levels of anxiety exhibited by multilinguals regarding English class perform-
ance was suggested by Cenoz (2013). She argues that the experience multilinguals acquired as a
result of learning multiple languages helps reduce their levels of anxiety. Their experiences of learn-
ing multiple languages likely lead them to feel less anxious about the language learning experience
in general. They likely learned effective strategies on how to become good language learners when
studying the first language and can transfer the strategies when acquiring an additional language.
A surprising result of this study is that while the multilingual students exhibited lower anxiety,
they also exhibited lower self-confidence, which is a result that contradicts previous work on this
topic; generally, students with experience with more than one language have higher self-confidence.
Thinking carefully about this context, there are potential reasons why these Saudi multilingual lear-
ners patterned differently than multilingual learners in other contexts. For example, the requirement
for French for these multilinguals meant that learning an additional language was not a choice.
Granted, this is also the case for other contexts; however, the Saudi context has overall less instances
of multilingualism than many other contexts. English is king, so to speak, and almost all language
learning efforts are put towards English, conceptualized as a global language. Thinking about
these issues simultaneously, the context for language learning and the world-wide status of
English, perhaps the Saudi multilingual students were less self-confident in English because they
felt that their time was being squandered on the required French classes. What complicates
matters more, however, is that the self-rated proficiency of the multilinguals was, on average,
higher than the bilinguals. Thus, the multilinguals were simultaneously reporting higher perceived
proficiency and lower self-confidence in English. Although this data was not analyzed for these par-
ticipants, it’s possible that the multilingual students in this study did not see the positive interactions
between languages studied (see Thompson 2016). Thompson’s concept of Perceived Positive
Language Interaction (PPLI) postulated that advantages of multilingualism can only be fully realized
if the individual perceives positive language interactions between languages studied. Without this
explicit realization on the part of the individual, it is plausible that self-confidence in all languages
could be lower, as was seen in this data.
An important point to consider with the anxiety result, specifically, is that the emotions being
reported were for English, the language that all of the students in this study had learned. The
additional experience with French that some of them had was limited – two semesters in this
case. This limited experience with French reflected in their emotions towards English, both for
anxiety and self-confidence, resulting in significantly lower self-confidence and lower anxiety in
English for those students with French experience. Not only did the subsequent language study
influence a previous language studied, but it took very little additional language learning experience
to see these results. As was noted in Thompson and Khawaja (2016), ‘The significant differences
found between the bilinguals and multilinguals provide further evidence that even low levels of
additional language learning experiences can affect affective variables (such as anxiety) in language
learners’ (13). This relationship transcends the boundaries of a specific language of study, demon-
strating benefits across all languages studied.

Limitations
While these findings are interesting since they are related to a context that has not been extensively
examined previously, these results should be interpreted with caution. One of the study’s limitations
is that the findings are based solely on a self-reported questionnaire. No other qualitative methods
such as interviews or focus group discussions were used to further examine the affective profiles of
the participants. Future studies should include interviews of participants as that will provide further
exploration of the discussed issues. Furthermore, even though the sample size is large enough to
draw conclusions, the inclusion of participants from other universities in other parts of the Saudi
Arabia could have yielded different outcomes. Another limitation is that the current study has not
accounted for other variables that could have impacted students’ emotions related to English,
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 13

such as motivation. Therefore, future research should investigate the role played by motivation and
willingness to communicate among other variables in reducing FLA and raising self-confidence
among FL learners.

Conclusion
The goal of this study was to examine the underlying latent variables of the FLCAS, specifically
verifying the positive psychology component in this data collection instrument. Additionally, we
aimed to investigate potential significant differences in the resulting anxiety and self-confidence
dimensions of the FLCAS between bilingual and multilingual learners, specifically seeing how
experience with an additional language could affect affective variables with other languages
studied. In terms of the context, this study is one of the few with multilingual participants
from Saudi Arabia. Two dimensions of the FLCAS that were reported in previous studies were
also identified in the current study: ‘English class performance anxiety’ and ‘confidence with
English.’ Although multilingual Saudi EFL students experienced lower levels of anxiety in
English, they also showed lower levels of ‘self-confidence in the target language’ than their bilin-
gual peers, adding to the growing body of evidence of the complex impacts of experience with
multiple languages. Certainly, the unexpected results with self-confidence is an area ripe for
future research in the Saudi context.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes on contributors
Elias Bensalem is Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics in the Department of Languages and Translation at the
Northern Border University in Saudi Arabia, where he teaches in the BA English program. His research centers on
issues related to second-language learning, individual differences and emotional variables in second-language acqui-
sition, and computer-assisted language learning. Dr. Bensalem is the author of several articles related to language learn-
ing and teaching, and he is a reviewer for a number of peer-reviewed journals.
Amy S. Thompson, Ph.D. (Ph.D. Michigan State University) is a Professor of Applied Linguistics and Department Chair of
the Department of World Languages, Literatures, & Linguistics at West Virginia University. Her teaching experience
includes a range of theoretical and methodological courses in Applied Linguistics. Regarding research, her primary
research foci involve Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition and the interaction of these IDs and multi-
lingualism. Thompson has authored a book about context and motivation (Multilingual Matters, 2021) and has co-
authored a book about language learning in Anglophone settings (Palgrave, 2021). Other examples of her research
can be found in journals such as the Modern Language Journal, TESOL Quarterly, Foreign Language Annals, and the Inter-
national Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, among others.

ORCID
Elias Bensalem http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6018-0897
Amy S. Thompson http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4505-1755

References
Al-Hazmi, S. 2003. “EFL Teacher Preparation Programs in Saudi Arabia: Trends and Challenges.” TESOL Quarterly 37 (2):
341–344. doi:10.2307/3588509.
Al-Saraj, T. M. 2013. “Foreign Language Anxiety in Female Arabs Learning English: Case Studies.” Innovation in Language
Learning and Teaching 8 (3), 257–278. doi:10.1080/17501229.2013.837911.
Al-Saraj, T. 2014. “Revisiting the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS): The Anxiety of Female English
Language Learners in Saudi Arabia.” L2 Journal 6 (1): 50–76.
14 E. BENSALEM AND A. S. THOMPSON

Al-Seghayer, K. 2013. “The Actuality, Inefficiency, and Needs of EFL Teacher-Preparation Programs in Saudi Arabia.”
International Journal of Applied Linguistics &amp; English Literature 3 (1): 143–151.
Bensalem, E. 2019. “Multilingualism and Foreign Language Anxiety: the Case of Saudi EFL Learners.” Learning and
Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives 15 (2). doi:10.18538/lthe.v15.n2.314
Bensalem, E. 2021. “Classroom Enjoyment and Anxiety among Saudi Undergraduate EFL Students: Does Gender
Matter?” Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics 18: 9–34. doi:10.35869/vial.v0i18.3363
Brown, H. D. 1994. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall Regents.
Cenoz, J. 2013. “The Influence of Bilingualism on Third Language Acquisition: Focus on Multilingualism.” Language
Teaching 46 (1): 71–86. doi:10.1017/S0261444811000218
Dewaele, J.-M. 2007. “The Effect of Multilingualism, Sociobiographical, and Situational Factors on Communicative
Anxiety and Foreign Language Anxiety of Mature Language Learners.” The International Journal of Bilingualism 11
(4): 391–409. doi:10.1177/13670069070110040301
Dewaele, J.-M. 2010. “Multilingualism and Affordances: Variation in Self-Perceived Communicative Competence and
Communicative Anxiety in French L1, L2, L3 and L4.” IRAL 48 (2-3): 105–129. doi:10.1515/iral.2010.006.
Dewaele, J.-M., and T. Al-Saraj. 2015. “Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety of Arab Learners of English: The Effect of
Personality, Linguistic and Sociobiographical Variables.” Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 5 (2):
205–228.
Dewaele, J.-M., and M. Alfawzan. 2018. “Does the Effect of Enjoyment Outweigh That of Anxiety in Foreign Language
Performance?” Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 8 (1): 21–45. doi:10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.1.2
Dewaele, J.-M., and L. Dewaele. 2017. “The Dynamic Interactions in Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety and Foreign
Language Enjoyment of Pupils Aged 12 to 18: A Pseudo-Longitudinal Investigation.” Journal of the European Second
Language Association 1: 11–22. doi:10.22599/jesla.6.
Dewaele, J.-M., and P. D. MacIntyre. 2016. “The two Faces of Janus? Anxiety and Enjoyment in the Foreign Language
Classroom.” Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 4: 237–274.
Dewaele, J.-M., K. V. Petrides, and A. Furnham. 2008. “Effects of Trait Emotional Intelligence and Sociobiographical
Variables on Communicative Anxiety and Foreign Language Anxiety among Adult Multilinguals: A Review and
Empirical Investigation.” Language Learning 58: 91–960. doi.10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00482.x.
Dewaele, J.-M., and A. Stavans. 2014. “The Effect of Immigration, Acculturation and Multicompetence on Personality
Profiles of Israeli Multilinguals.” International Journal of Bilingualism 18 (3): 203–221. doi:10.1177/1367006912439941
Dewaele, J.-M., J. Witney, K. Saito, and L. Dewaele. 2018. “Foreign Language Enjoyment and Anxiety in the FL Classroom:
The Effect of Teacher and Learner Variables.” Language Teaching Research 22 (6): 676–697.
EF. 2018. EF English Proficiency Index 2015. Education First. https://www.ef.com/wwen/epi/
Ethnologue. 2019. Saudi Arabia. [online] Available at: https://www.ethnologue.com/country/SA.
Field, A. 2013. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. 4th ed. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Fredrickson, B. 2009. Positivity: Groundbreaking Research Reveals how to Embrace the Hidden Strength of Positive
Emotions, Overcome Negativity, and Thrive. New York: Crown Archetype.
Hamouda, A. 2013. “An Exploration of Causes of Saudi Students’ Reluctance to Participate in the English Language
Classroom.” International Journal of English Language Education 1: 17–34. doi:10.5296/ijele.v1i1.2652.
Holliday, A. 1999. “Small Cultures.” Applied Linguistics 20 (2): 237–264.
Horwitz, E. K. 2016. “Factor Structure of Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale: Comment on Park (2014).”
Psychological Reports 119 (1): 71–76. doi:10.1177/0033294116653368
Horwitz, E. 2017. “On the Misreading of Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope (1986) and the Need to Balance Anxiety Research
and the Experiences of Anxious Language Learners.” In New Insights Into Language Anxiety: Theory, Research and
Educational Implications, edited by C. Gkonou, M. Daubney, and J.-M. Dewaele, 31–47. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Horwitz, E. K., M. B. Horwitz, and J. Cope. 1986. “Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety.” The Modern Language Journal 70
(2): 125–132.
Kemp, C. 2001. Metalinguistic awareness in multilinguals: Implicit and explicit grammatical awareness and its relationship
with language experience and language attainment. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Edinburgh.
MacIntyre, P. D. 2017. “An Overview of Language Anxiety Research and Trends in its Development.” In New Insights Into
Language Anxiety: Theory, Research and Educational Implications, edited by C. Gkonou, M. Daubney, and J.-M.
Dewaele, 11–30. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
MacIntyre, P. D., R. Clément, Z. Dörnyei, and K. A. Noels. 1998. “Conceptualizing Willingness to Communicate in a L2: A
Situational Model of L2 Confidence and Affiliation.” The Modern Language Journal 82 (4): 545–562. doi:10.1111/j.
1540-4781.1998.tb05543.x
MacIntyre, P. D., and T. Gregersen. 2012. “Affect: The Role of Language Anxiety and Other Emotions in Language
Learning.” In Language Learning Psychology: Research, Theory and Pedagogy, edited by S. Mercer, S. Ryan, and M.
Williams, 103–118. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
MacIntyre, P. D., T. Gregersen, and S. Mercer. 2019. “Setting an Agenda for Positive Psychology in SLA: Theory, Practice,
and Research.” Modern Language Journal 103 (1): 262–274. doi:10.1111/modl.12544
Mahboob, A., and T. Elyas. 2014. “English in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.” World Englishes 33 (1): 128–142.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 15

Mercer, S. 2016. “The Context Within me: L2 Self as a Complex Dynamic System.” In The Dynamic Interplay Between
Context and the Language Learner, edited by J. King, 11–28. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/
9781137457134_2.
Park, G.-P. 2014. “Factor Analysis of the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale in Korean Learners of English as a
Foreign Language.” Psychological Reports 115 (1): 261–275. doi:10.2466/28.11.PR0.115c10z2
Pavelescu, L. M., and B. Petrić. 2018. “Love and Enjoyment in Context: Four Case Studies of Adolescent EFL Learners.”
Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 8 (1): 73–101. doi:10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.1.4
Phongsa, M., S. A. M. Mohamed Ismail, and H. Low. 2017. “Multilingual Effects on EFL Learning: A Comparison of Foreign
Language Anxiety Experienced by Monolingual and Bilingual Tertiary Students in the Lao PDR.” Journal of
Multilingual and Multicultural Development, doi.10.1080/01434632.2017.1371723.
Santos, A., J. Cenoz, and D. Gorter. 2015. “Communicative Anxiety in English as a Third Language.” International Journal
of Bilingualism and Bilingual Education, doi.10.1080/13670050.2015.1105780.
Santos, A., D. Gorter, and J. Cenoz. 2017. “Communicative Anxiety in the Second and Third Language.” International
Journal of Multilingualism 14 (1): 23–37. doi:10.1080/14790718.2017.1258980
Tanielian, A. R. 2017. “Foreign Language Anxiety among First-Year Saudi University Students.” International Education
Journal: Comparative Perspectives 16 (2): 116–130.
Thompson, A. S. 2016. “How do Multilinguals Conceptualize Interactions among Languages Studied? Operationalizing
Perceived Positive Language Interaction (PPLI).” In The Usage-Based Study of Language Learning and Multilingualism,
edited by L. Ortega, A. Tyler, and M. Uno, 91–111. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.
Thompson, A. S., and A. Khawaja. 2016. “Foreign Language Anxiety in Turkey: The Role of Multilingualism.” Journal of
Multilingual and Multicultural Development 37 (2): 115–130.
Thompson, A. S., and J. Lee. 2013. “Anxiety and EFL: Does Multilingualism Matter?” International Journal of Bilingual
Education and Bilingualism 16 (6): 730–749. doi:10.1080/13670050.2012.713322
Thompson, A. S., and L. K. Sylvén. 2015. “Does English Make you Nervous?” Anxiety Profiles of CLIL and non-CLIL
Students in Sweden.” Apples: Journal of Applied Language Studies 9 (2): 1–23.
Tum, D. O. 2015. “Foreign Language Anxiety’s Forgotten Study: The Case of the Anxious Preservice Teacher.” TESOL
Quarterly 49 (4): 627–658. doi:10.1002/tesq.190.