The Role of Cognitive and Affective Factors in Measures of L2 Writing
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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].”
From All Public Voices Are Equal, But Are Some More Equal Than Others to LLMs? (2026) · cites this paper as [100]
Cites
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60452-1 · Cited by 9,860 · see citing works
Working memory: Looking back and looking forward
Baddeley, A. (2003) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1201 · Cited by 5,200 · see citing works
The Influence of Planning and Task Type on Second Language Performance
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263100015047 · Cited by 1,147 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Therefore, following Foster and Skehan (1996), writing complexity was measured in this study by counting the number of subordinate clauses to T-units.”
MethodSELF-EFFICACY FOR READING AND WRITING: INFLUENCE OF MODELING, GOAL SETTING, AND SELF-EVALUATION
Schunk, D. H. (2003) · Reading & Writing Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10573560308219 · Cited by 876 · see citing works
Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing
Bruning, R., Dempsey, M., Kauffman, D. F., McKim, C., & Zumbrunn, S. (2013) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0029692 · Cited by 470 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sun, Q., & Zhang, L. J. (2023) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-022-03416-0 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Exploring the effects of Grammarly on EFL students’ foreign language anxiety and learner autonomy
Dizon, G., & Gold, J. (2023) · The JALT CALL Journal · doi:10.29140/jaltcall.v19n3.1049 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Zhou, C., & Wang, Y. (2026) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.70478 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Cognitive load scale for AI-assisted L2 writing: scale development and validation
Yao, G., & Fan, L. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1666974 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
All Public Voices Are Equal, But Are Some More Equal Than Others to LLMs?
Kim, S., Janssen, M. A., Wang, J., Min-Venditti, A., Karanjia, N., & Anderies, J. M. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.17247
- Authors
- Zabihi, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Neyshabur (IR)
- Corresponding author
- Zabihi, Reza
- ORCID
- Zabihi, Reza
- Venue
- Written Communication
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- 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