CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 22EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningCreativity in Education and NeurosciencePersonality Traits and Psychology

Creativity and Personality Traits as Foreign Language Acquisition Predictors in University Linguistics Students

Open access
Novikova, Irina A., Berisha, Nadezhda S., Novikov, Alexey L., Shlyakhta, Dmitriy A.·2020·Behavioral Sciences
DOI 10.3390/bs10010035PMC PMC7016726
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Foreign (second) language (FL/SL) proficiency is one of the most important competencies for a modern person, and is necessary for both professional and personal fulfillment. The purpose of this study is to consider and compare personality traits and creativity as predictors of success in foreign language acquisition (FLA). The sample includes 128 (105 female and 23 male) first- and second-year university linguistics students. Creativity is measured by the Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults (ATTA). The FFM personality traits are measured by the Russian NEO Five-Factor Inventory adaptation by S. Biryukov and M. Bodunov. To assess the level of FL proficiency, we used a traditional academic achievement indicator (the semester’s final grades in English), as well as the English teachers’ assessment of the level of language proficiency of their students according to the “Foreign Language Proficiency Scale” (10 indicators and total score). Descriptive statistics methods and a multiple regression analysis were used to process the data in the R software environment, version 3.5.2. The findings of our research showed that creativity indicators have a stronger but contradictory impact on the level of FL proficiency compared to personality traits. We suggest that teachers, most likely, lack knowledge on the manifestations of student creativity in the process of FL learning.

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 · 10.3390/bs10010035

Cites

45 of 46 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?

  • High levels of extraversion and conscientiousness were associated with better pronunciation, better syntactic and lexical skills and better L2 fluency.

    “It was found that high levels of extraversion and conscientiousness were associated with better pronunciation, better syntactic and lexical skills and better L2 fluency; while high levels of introversion correlated with better performance on written L2 tasks (Novikova et al., 2020;Ockey, 2011;van Daele et al., 2006).”

    From The Role of Personality in Language Learning (2026) · cites this paper as Novikova et al., 2020

    The Results report that extraversion had a non-significant, negative association with speaking and communication assessments, contrary to the claimed positive association. Conscientiousness was positively associated with some overall proficiency assessments, but the Results do not establish the claimed improvements in pronunciation, syntax, vocabulary, and L2 fluency. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • High levels of conscientiousness seem to promote better acquisition of pronunciation, vocabulary, and syntax.

    “high levels of conscientiousness seem to promote better acquisition of pronunciation, vocabulary and syntax (Novikova et al., 2020;Ockey, 2011).”

    From The Role of Personality in Language Learning (2026) · cites this paper as Novikova et al., 2020

    The Results report that conscientiousness was a significant positive predictor of teachers’ overall foreign-language-proficiency score. They identify its significant positive associations as diligence, creativity, and the total score—not phonetics or vocabulary; syntax was not a separate measure (Methods, §2.2). Thus the paper supports the general association but not the claim about those three specific aspects of acquisition. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • It is highly likely that personality structure can influence language and vice versa.

    “If the neurofunctional systems involved in personality and language are intertwined, it is highly likely that personality structure can influence language and vice versa (Dewaele, 2012;Novikova et al., 2020).”

    From The Role of Personality in Language Learning (2026) · cites this paper as Novikova et al., 2020

    The Introduction describes personality traits as predictors of foreign-language acquisition and proficiency, supporting the proposed influence of personality on language learning. It does not say that language influences personality in return; the passages address only the first direction. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • High levels of introversion correlated with better performance on written L2 tasks.

    “while high levels of introversion correlated with better performance on written L2 tasks (Novikova et al., 2020;Ockey, 2011;van Daele et al., 2006).”

    From The Role of Personality in Language Learning (2026) · cites this paper as Novikova et al., 2020

    The Results section reports that extraversion had a non-significant negative effect in several models, but not in the Writing model; the Writing model itself was not significant. Our copy does not report a correlation between high introversion and better written L2 performance (searched for introversion and writing/extraversion). (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 1

  1. [47]Cambridge ESOL Cambridge IELTS 5. Examination papers from University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations: English for Speakers of Other Languages Cambridge University Press Cambridge, UK 2006

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Novikova, I. A., Berisha, N. S., Novikov, A. L., & Shlyakhta, D. A.
Affiliations
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RU)
Corresponding author
Novikova, Irina A.
ORCID
Venue
Behavioral Sciences
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-01-15
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
35
ISSN
2076-328X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/bs10010035
PMC
PMC7016726
OpenAlex
W3000080385
Cited by
22
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1
FWCI
13.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Behavioral Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
RUDN University (Program “5 – 100”, 5–100)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
creativity, personality traits, foreign language acquisition, language proficiency, Big Five personality traits, linguistics students, English as a foreign language, academic performance

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