CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 13EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and LearningPhonetics and Phonology Research

Diving Deep Into the Relationship Between Speech Fluency and Second Language Proficiency: A Meta‐Analysis

Open access
Yan, Xun, Lei, Yuyun, Pan, Yulin·2025·Language Learning
DOI 10.1111/lang.12701
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Abundant research has indicated fluency features as meaningful predictors of second language proficiency. However, the extent to which different fluency dimensions and features can predict proficiency remains underexplored. This meta‐analysis employed a multilevel modeling approach to synthesize fluency–proficiency relationships from 71 empirical studies from 1959–2023. Additionally, we examined several moderator variables, including task type, learning context, age, and proficiency measure. The correlations found were strongly positive for speed ( r = .55), moderately positive for productivity ( r = .38), moderately negative for breakdown ( r = −.33), and weakly negative for repair ( r = −.11). Moderator analyses revealed that task, learning context, and proficiency measure influence fluency–proficiency relationships in the repair, productivity, and speed dimensions, respectively. Post hoc analyses also suggested that the operationalization of breakdown features might make a difference in fluency–proficiency relationships. This study has both theoretical and methodological implications for second language fluency research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/lang.12701

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 63

  1. Berman, R., & Verhoeven, L. (2002). Cross-linguistic perspectives on the development of text-production abilities: Speech and writing. Written Language & Literacy, 5(1), 1-43. https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.5.1.02ber Bosker, H. R., Pinget, A. F., Quené, H., Sanders, T., & De Jong, N. H. (2013). What makes speech sound fluent? The contributions of pauses, speed and repairs. Language Testing, 30(2), 159-175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532212455394 · DOI
  2. Bosker, H. R., Quené, H., Sanders, T., & De Jong, N. H. (2014). Native 'um's elicit prediction of low-frequency referents, but non-native 'um's do not. Journal of Memory and Language, 75, 104-116. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2014.05.004 · DOI
  3. Chambers, F. (1997). What do we mean by fluency? System, 25(4), 535-544. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(97)00046-8 · DOI
  4. Chen, H. C. (2011). An acoustic analysis of intra-sentential pause patterns by Taiwanese learners of English. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 77-94. 1085 Language Learning 75:4, December 2025, pp. 1051-1090 14679922, 2025, 4, · DOI
  5. Cheng, L. (2014). Effects of pragmatic task features, English proficiency, and learning setting on Chinese ESL/EFL spoken performance of requests. [Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University]. Purdue e-Pubs. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/dissertations/AAI3668776
  6. Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Boves, L. (2002). Quantitative assessment of second language learners' fluency: Comparisons between read and spontaneous speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 111(6), 2862-2873. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1471894 · DOI
  7. De Jong, N. H., & Bosker, H. R. (2013). Choosing a threshold for silent pauses to measure second language fluency. In R. Eklund (Ed.), Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech (DiSS) (pp. 17-20).
  8. De Jong, N. H., Groenhout, R., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2015). Second language fluency: Speaking style or proficiency? Correcting measures of second language fluency for first language behavior. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(2), 223-243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716413000210 · DOI
  9. De Jong, N. H., Steinel, M. P., Florijn, A., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2013). Linguistic skills and speaking fluency in a second language. Applied psycholinguistics, 34(5), 893-916. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716412000069 · DOI
  10. Dewaele, J. M., Housen, A., & Wei, L. (Eds.), (2003). Bilingualism: Beyond basic principles. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853596315 · DOI
  11. Dimova, S., Yan, X., & Ginther, A. (2020). Local language testing: Design, implementation, and development. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429492242 · DOI
  12. Dimova, S., Yan, X., & Ginther, A. (2022). Local tests, local contexts. Language Testing, 39(3), 341-354. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322221092392 · DOI
  13. Eren, Ö., Kılıç, M., & Bada, E. (2022). Fluency in L2: read and spontaneous speech pausing patterns of Turkish, Swahili, Hausa and Arabic Speakers of English. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 51(2), 237-253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-021-09822-y · DOI
  14. Gao, J., & Sun, P. P. (2024). How does learners' L2 utterance fluency relate to their L1? A meta-analysis. International Journal of Applied Linguistics. 34(1), 276-291. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12493 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Ginther, A., Dimova, S., & Yang, R. (2010). Conceptual and empirical relationships between temporal measures of fluency and oral English proficiency with implications for automated scoring. Language Testing, 27(3), 379-399. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532210364407 Language Learning 75:4, December 2025, pp. 1051-1090 1086 14679922, 2025, 4, · DOI
  16. Götz, S. (2013). Fluency in native and nonnative English speech. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl. · DOI
  17. Higgins, J. P., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21(11), 1539-1558. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Hox, J. J., Moerbeek, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2018). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315650982 · DOI
  19. Hsieh, C. N., & Wang, Y. (2019). Speaking proficiency of young language students: A discourse-analytic study. Language Testing, 36(1), 27-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532217734240 · DOI
  20. Iwashita, N., Brown, A., McNamara, T., & O'Hagan, S. (2008). Assessed levels of second language speaking proficiency: How distinct? Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 24-49. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm017 · DOI
  21. Jackson, D. O., & Suethanapornkul, S. (2013). The cognition hypothesis: A synthesis and meta-analysis of research on second language task complexity. Language Learning, 63(2), 330-367. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12008 · DOI
  22. Kahng, J. (2014). Exploring utterance and cognitive fluency of L1 and L2 English speakers: Temporal measures and stimulated recall. Language Learning, 64(4), 809-854. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12084 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Kahng, J. (2018). The effect of pause location on perceived fluency. Applied Psycholinguistics, 39(3), 569-591. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716417000534 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Kahng, J. (2020). Explaining second language utterance fluency: Contribution of cognitive fluency and first language utterance fluency. Applied Psycholinguistics, 41(2), 457-480. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000065 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Kowal, S., O'Connell, D. C., & Sabin, E. J. (1975). Development of temporal patterning and vocal hesitations in spontaneous narratives. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 4(3), 195-207. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01066950 · DOI
  26. Lei, Y. (2021). Investigating oral performance on controlled versus spontaneous speaking tasks: Implications for second language pedagogy and assessment [Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign]. IDEALS [institutional repository]. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/items/121080
  27. Lei, Y., & Yan, X. (2022). An exploratory study of strategy use on elicited imitation tasks. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 917168. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.917168 1087 Language Learning 75:4, December 2025, pp. 1051-1090 14679922, 2025, 4, · DOI
  28. Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40(3), 387-417. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00669.x · DOI
  29. Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. MIT Press.
  30. Lundell, F. F., Bartning, I., Engel, H., Gudmundson, A., Hancock, V., & Lindqvist, C. (2014). Beyond advanced stages in high-level spoken L2 French. Journal of French Language Studies, 24(2), 255-280. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959269513000057 · DOI
  31. Maclay, H., & Osgood, C. E. (1959). Hesitation phenomena in spontaneous English speech. Word, 15(1), 19-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1959.11659682 · DOI
  32. Malone, M. E., Rifkin, B., Christian, D., & Johnson, D. E. (2003, January 23-25). Attaining high levels of proficiency: Challenges for language education in the United States [Paper presentation]. Conference on Global Challenges and US Higher Education, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.
  33. Nip, I. S., & Green, J. R. (2013). Increases in cognitive and linguistic processing primarily account for increases in speaking rate with age. Child Development, 84(4), 1324-1337. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12052 · DOI
  34. Nippold, M. A., Frantz-Kaspar, M. W., & Vigeland, L. M. (2017). Spoken language production in young adults: Examining syntactic complexity. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60(5), 1339-1347. https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_JSLHR-L-16-0124 · DOI
  35. Orwin, R. G. (1983). A fail-safe N for effect size in meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Statistics, 8(2), 157-159. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986008002157 · DOI
  36. Park, H. I., Solon, M., Dehghan-Chaleshtori, M., & Ghanbar, H. (2022). Proficiency reporting practices in research on second language acquisition: Have we made any progress? Language Learning, 72(1), 198-236. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12475 · DOI
  37. Plonsky, L., & Derrick, D. J. (2016). A meta-analysis of reliability coefficients in second language research. The Modern Language Journal, 100(2), 538-553. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12335 · DOI
  38. Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is "big"? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878-912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079 · DOI · Paper page
  39. Révész, A. (2014). Towards a fuller assessment of cognitive models of task-based learning: Investigating task-generated cognitive demands and processes. Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 87-92. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt039 · DOI
  40. Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 27-57. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.27 · DOI · Paper page
  41. Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 638-641. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203851357 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Segalowitz, N., & Freed, B. F. (2004). Context, contact, and cognition in oral fluency acquisition: Learning Spanish in at home and study abroad contexts. Studies in Language Learning 75:4, December 2025, pp. 1051-1090 1088 14679922, 2025, 4, Second Language Acquisition, 26(2), 173-199. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104262027 · DOI
  44. Segalowitz, N., & Hulstijn, J. (2005). Automaticity in second language learning. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. De Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp.371-388). Oxford University Press.
  45. Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368829802900209 · DOI
  46. Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Language Teaching, 36(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144480200188X · DOI
  47. Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2008). Complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis in task-based performance: A meta-analysis of the Ealing research. In S. Van Daele, A. Housen, F. Kuiken, M. Pierrard, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language use, learning, & teaching (pp. 207-226). Brussels: Contactforum.
  48. Spolsky, B. (1989). Communicative competence, language proficiency, and beyond. Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 138-156. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/10.2.138 · DOI
  49. Sturm, J. A., & Seery, C. H. (2007). Speech and articulatory rates of school-age children in conversation and narrative contexts. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 38, 47-59. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2007/005) · DOI
  50. Suzuki, S., & Kormos, J. (2023). The multidimensionality of second language oral fluency: Interfacing cognitive fluency and utterance fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 45(1), 38-64. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263121000899 · DOI
  51. Suzuki, S., Kormos, J., & Uchihara, T. (2021). The relationship between utterance and perceived fluency: A meta-analysis of correlational studies. The Modern Language Journal, 105(2), 435-463. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12706 · DOI
  52. Tavakoli, P. (2016). Fluency in monologic and dialogic task performance: Challenges in defining and measuring L2 fluency. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54(2), 133-150. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-9994 · DOI · Paper page
  53. Tavakoli, P., & Hunter, A. M. (2018). Is fluency being 'neglected' in the classroom? Teacher understanding of fluency and related classroom practices. Language Teaching Research, 22(3), 330-349. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817708462 · DOI · Paper page
  54. Tavakoli, P., Nakatsuhara, F., & Hunter, A. M. (2020). Aspects of fluency across assessed levels of speaking proficiency. The Modern Language Journal, 104(1), 169-191. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12620 · DOI · Paper page
  55. Tullock, B., & Ortega, L. (2017). Fluency and multilingualism in study abroad: Lessons from a scoping review. System, 71, 7-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.09.019 · DOI
  56. Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1-48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · DOI · Paper page
  57. Wright, C. (2020). Effects of task type on L2 Mandarin fluency development. Journal of Second Language Studies, 3(2), 157-179. https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.00010. · DOI
  58. wri · DOI
  59. Yan, X., Kim, H. R., & Kim, J. Y. (2021). Dimensionality of speech fluency: Examining the relationships among complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) 1089 Language Learning 75:4, December 2025, pp. 1051-1090 14679922, 2025, 4, features of speaking performances on the Aptis test. Language Testing, 38(4), 485-510. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532220951508 · DOI
  60. Yan, X., Lei, Y., & Shih, C. (2020). A corpus-driven, curriculum-based Chinese elicited imitation test in US universities. Foreign Language Annals, 53(4), 704-732. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12492 · DOI
  61. Yan, X., Lei, Y., & Shih, C. (2024). Are textbooks authentic from a developmental perspective? A corpus analysis of word use in Chinese textbooks in US universities. Applied Linguistics, 45(5), 849-872. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amad073 · DOI
  62. Yan, X., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Ginther, A. (2016). Elicited imitation as a measure of second language proficiency: A narrative review and meta-analysis. Language Testing, 33(4), 497-528. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215594643 · DOI
  63. Youn, S. J. (2015). Validity argument for assessing L2 pragmatics in interaction using mixed methods. Language Testing, 32(2), 199-225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214557113 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yan, X., Lei, Y., & Pan, Y.
Affiliations
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • Western Kentucky University (US)
Corresponding author
Yan, Xun
ORCID
Venue
Language Learning
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2025-01-12
Volume
75
Issue
4
Pages
1051-1090
ISSN
  • 0023-8333 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9922
DOI
10.1111/lang.12701
OpenAlex
W4406306914
Cited by
13
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6
FWCI
46.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Language Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
Keywords
second language fluency, second language proficiency, speech rate, productivity, breakdown, repair, task type, learning context, age of onset

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