CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 305EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningEnglish Language Learning and TeachingMobile Learning in Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The impact of Google Assistant on adolescent EFL learners’ willingness to communicate

Tai, Tzu-Yu, Chen, Howard Hao-Jan·2023·Interactive Learning Environments
DOI 10.1080/10494820.2020.1841801
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Willingness to communicate (WTC) is considered to be an important factor contributing to successful foreign language learning. Many studies aim at finding effective tools for enhancing WTC. With the support of AI and Automatic Speech Recognition technology, intelligent personal assistants (IPAs) seem to have potentials in improving foreign language learners’ WTC. However, few empirical studies focus on the possible impact of IPAs on learners’ WTC. This study was conducted to investigate the potentials of an IPA, Google Assistant, for developing adolescent EFL learners’ WTC and their perceptions of IPAs for EFL learning. This study recruited 112 eighth-grade EFL learners who engaged in Google-Assistant-language-learning activities for two weeks. Two WTC questionnaires were administered at the beginning and end of the intervention. The results demonstrated that Google Assistant significantly promoted EFL learners’ WTC, enhanced communicative confidence, and reduced speaking anxiety. Analyses of interviews revealed that participants enjoyed playing games with Google Assistant and talking to chatbots, which helped them feel less anxious and motivated to use English for real and meaningful communication. The findings indicated that IPA-based interaction provided a less threatening environment, in which learners displayed higher levels of engagement, motivation, confidence, and, in turn, their WTC in the target language.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10494820.2020.1841801

Cites

28 of 28 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 28 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Dizon G., 2020, Language Learning & Technology, 24, 16
  2. Eddy-U M., 2015, Science Direct, 50, 43
  3. Sandeep S. S., 2019, Journal of The Gujarat Research Society, 21, 619
  4. Sauro S., 2019, Language Learning & Technology, 23, 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–305 of 305

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Tai, T.-Y., & Chen, H. H.-J.
Affiliations
  • National Tsing Hua University (TW)
  • National Taiwan Normal University (TW)
Corresponding author
Chen, Howard Hao-Jan
ORCID
Venue
Interactive Learning Environments
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2020-11-15
Volume
31
Issue
3
Pages
1485-1502
ISSN
  • 1049-4820 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-5191
DOI
10.1080/10494820.2020.1841801
OpenAlex
W3100449273
Cited by
302
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 70 · 2025: 96 · 2024: 65 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 7
FWCI
82.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Interactive Learning Environments (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Chinese Language and Technology Center of National Taiwan Normal University
  • Ministry of Education in Taiwan
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › English Language Learning and Teaching
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Mobile Learning in Education
Keywords
Google Assistant, willingness to communicate, virtual assistants, EFL learners, adolescents, speaking anxiety, communication confidence, chatbots, game-based interaction, student motivation, learner perceptions, AI-assisted language learning

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