CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 122

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How implementing an AI chatbot impacts Korean as a foreign language learners’ willingness to communicate in Korean

Kim, Arum, Su, Yuzhu·2024·System
DOI 10.1016/j.system.2024.103256
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study examined the influence of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots on the willingness to communicate (WTC) of Korean as a foreign language learners. In total, 65 students participated in a semester-long study. Classes were randomly assigned to an experimental group (n = 20) or a control group (n = 45). As part of their language learning, the experimental group engaged in communicative activities with an AI chatbot eight times in class, while the control group engaged in conventional communicative activities. Data collection involved administering the WTC questionnaire. Additionally, the experimental group voluntarily participated in semi-structured interviews. An independent sample t-test revealed no statistically significant difference in WTC levels between the two groups at the beginning of the semester (t(63) = −0.016, p = .987). However, the ANCOVA conducted after eight intervention sessions demonstrated significant improvements in WTC, reduced anxiety levels, and enhanced communication confidence among students in the experimental group (F(1, 62) = 393.740, p = .000). Analyses of the interviews revealed that students experienced decreased anxiety, enhancing their WTC in Korean. These findings suggested that chatbot-mediated interactions created a learner-friendly learning environment wherein learners displayed higher-level engagement and, consequently, an enhanced WTC in Korean.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.system.2024.103256

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 9 references

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. Al-Murtadha, 2019, Enhancing EFL learners' willingness to communicate with visualization and goal-setting activities, Tesol Quarterly, 53, 133, 10.1002/tesq.474 · DOI
  2. Cao, 2011, Investigating situational willingness to communicate within second language classrooms from an ecological perspective, System, 39, 468, 10.1016/j.system.2011.10.016 · DOI
  3. Cao, 2014, A sociocognitive perspective on second language classroom willingness to communicate, Tesol Quarterly, 48, 789, 10.1002/tesq.155 · DOI
  4. Dizon, 2020, Evaluating intelligent personal assistants for L2 listening and speaking development, Language, Learning and Technology, 24, 16
  5. Freiermuth, 2006, Willingness to communicate, Handbook of Research on Electronic Surveys and Measurements, 16, 355
  6. Fryer, 2019, Chatbot learning partners: Connecting learning experiences, interest and competence, Computers in Human Behavior, 93, 279, 10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.023 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Haristiani, 2019, Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot as language learning medium: An inquiry, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1387
  8. Hashimoto, 2002, Motivation and willingness to communicate as predictors of reported L2 use: The Japanese ESL context, Second Language Studies, 20, 29
  9. Huang, 2022, Chatbots for language learning—are they really useful? A systematic review of chatbot-supported language learning, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38, 237, 10.1111/jcal.12610 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Jarrell, 2005, The motivational power of Internet chat, RELC Journal, 36, 59, 10.1177/0033688205053482 · DOI
  11. Kang, 2005, Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language, System, 33, 277, 10.1016/j.system.2004.10.004 · DOI
  12. Kissau, 2010, Leveling the playing field: The effects of online second language instruction on student willingness to communicate in French, CALICO Journal, 27, 277, 10.11139/cj.27.2.277-297 · DOI
  13. Lee, 2020, Willingness to communicate in digital and non-digital EFL contexts: Scale development and psychometric testing, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33, 688, 10.1080/09588221.2019.1588330 · DOI
  14. Liu, 2018, Bilingual/multilingual learners' willingness to communicate in and anxiety on speaking Chinese and their associations with self-rated proficiency in Chinese, International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21, 54, 10.1080/13670050.2015.1127889 · DOI
  15. MacIntyre, 2001, Willingness to communicate, social support, and language-learning orientations of immersion students, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 369, 10.1017/S0272263101003035 · DOI
  16. MacIntyre, 2003, Sex and age effects on willingness to communicate, anxiety, perceived competence, and L2 motivation among junior high school French immersion students, Language Learning, 53, 137, 10.1111/1467-9922.00226 · DOI
  17. MacIntyre, 2003, Talking in order to learn: Willingness to communicate and intensive language programs, Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 589, 10.3138/cmlr.59.4.589 · DOI
  18. MacIntyre, 1996, Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication, Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 3, 10.1177/0261927X960151001 · DOI
  19. MacIntyre, 1998, Conceptualizing willingness to a L2: Communicate in confidence model situational, The Modern Language Journal, 82, 545, 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb05543.x · DOI · Paper page
  20. Moussalli, 2020, Intelligent personal assistants: Can they understand and be understood by accented L2 learners?, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33, 865, 10.1080/09588221.2019.1595664 · DOI
  21. Munezane, 2015, Enhancing willingness to communicate: Relative effects of visualization and goal setting, The Modern Language Journal, 99, 175, 10.1111/modl.12193 · DOI
  22. Mystkowska-Wiertelak, 2016, Designing a tool for measuring the interrelationships between L2 WTC, confidence, beliefs, motivation, and context, 10.1007/978-3-319-30373-4_2 · DOI
  23. Peng, 2012, Towards an ecological understanding of willingness to communicate in EFL classrooms in China, System, 40, 203, 10.1016/j.system.2012.02.002 · DOI
  24. Peng, 2019, The roles of multimodal pedagogic effects and classroom environment in willingness to communicate in English, System, 82, 161, 10.1016/j.system.2019.04.006 · DOI
  25. Peng, 2010, Willingness to communicate in English: A model in the Chinese EFL classroom context, Language Learning, 60, 834, 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00576.x · DOI
  26. Reinders, 2014, Can I say something? The effects of digital game play on willingness to communicate, Language, Learning and Technology, 18, 101
  27. Sampson, 2020, L2 feelings through interaction in a Japanese-English online chat exchange, Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 15, 131, 10.1080/17501229.2019.1710514 · DOI
  28. Sandeep, 2019, Learning English language through Amazon Alexa for Indian students, Journal of the Gujarat Research Society, 21, 619
  29. Tai, 2022, Effects of intelligent personal assistants on EFL learners' oral proficiency outside the classroom, Computer Assisted Language Learning
  30. Tannenbaum, 2008, Willingness to communicate in the language of the other: Jewish and Arab students in Israel, Learning and Instruction, 18, 283, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.06.002 · DOI
  31. Wang, 2013, Using learning analytics to understand the design of an intelligent language tutor–chatbot Lucy, International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 4, 124
  32. Wang, 2017, VILLAGE—virtual immersive language learning and gaming environment: Immersion and presence, British Journal of Educational Technology, 48, 431, 10.1111/bjet.12388 · DOI
  33. Wen, 2003, A Chinese conceptualization of willingness to communicate in ESL, Language Culture and Curriculum, 16, 18, 10.1080/07908310308666654 · DOI
  34. Yang, 2022, Implementation of an AI chatbot as an English conversation partner in EFL speaking classes, ReCALL, 34, 327, 10.1017/S0958344022000039 · DOI
  35. Yashima, 2002, Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context, The Modern Language Journal, 86, 54, 10.1111/1540-4781.00136 · DOI
  36. Yashima, 2004, The influence of attitudes and affect on willingness to communicate and second language communication, Language Learning, 54, 119, 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00250.x · DOI · Paper page
  37. Yu, 2011, Effect of communication variables, affective variables, and teacher immediacy on willingness to communicate of foreign language learners, Chinese Journal of Communication, 4, 218, 10.1080/17544750.2011.565678 · DOI
  38. Zhang, 2018, To talk or not to talk: A review of situational antecedents of willingness to communicate in the second language classroom, System, 72, 226, 10.1016/j.system.2018.01.003 · DOI

Cited by

See all 122

Metadata

Authors
Kim, A., & Su, Y.
ORCID
Kim, Arum
Venue
System
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-06
Volume
122
Pages
103256
ISSN
0346-251X
DOI
10.1016/j.system.2024.103256
Cited by
122
References
9
Language
en
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How implementing an AI chatbot impacts Korean as a foreign language learners’ willingness to communicate in Korean. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.system.2024.103256
The paper
Kim, A., & Su, Y. (2024). How implementing an AI chatbot impacts Korean as a foreign language learners’ willingness to communicate in Korean. System. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103256