Cited by 124EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and LearningWriting and Handwriting Education

The Role of Cognitive and Affective Factors in Measures of L2 Writing

Zabihi, Reza·2018·Written Communication

Abstract

This study investigates the direct and/or indirect effects of some cognitive (working memory capacity) and affective (writing anxiety and writing self-efficacy) variables on the complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) of second language (L2) learners’ writings. To achieve this goal, 232 upper-intermediate English learners performed an automated version of a working memory capacity task (A-OSPAN) and a timed narrative writing task in L2. Furthermore, participants were asked to complete two self-report questionnaires. The proposed path model adequately fitted the data, and results of path analyses indicated the following: All three measures of L2 writing were directly predicted by learners’ writing self-efficacy; writing self-efficacy affected CAF indirectly through writing anxiety; the direct paths from writing anxiety to all measures of L2 writing were negatively significant; higher working memory spans directly predicted higher L2 writing scores regarding complexity and fluency, but negatively affected learners’ accuracy scores. Based on these findings, the author discusses techniques for enhancing learners’ writing self-efficacy, reducing their anxiety, and helping them make efficient use of working memory resources.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0741088317735836

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Writing quality varies across commenters for reasons including language background, educational access, and writing experience.

    “Writing quality varies across commenters for reasons including language background, educational access, and writing experience [25, 45, 100].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Zabihi, R.
Affiliations
University of Neyshabur (IR)
Corresponding author
Zabihi, Reza
Venue
Written Communication
Published
2017-11-13
Volume
35
Issue
1
Pages
32-57
ISSN
  • 0741-0883 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8472
OpenAlex
W2769203187
Cited by
124
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2
FWCI
25.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Written Communication (publishedVersion)
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 › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
Keywords
second language writing, writing self-efficacy, writing anxiety, working memory capacity, complexity, accuracy, and fluency, narrative writing, ESL learners

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