L2MSS理论视角下的中国英语二语学习者学习动机研究
|
摘要
本论文根据最新的二语习得动机理论------“二语动机自我系统”理论(Dornyei,2005,2009b,以下简称L2MSS理论)为研究框架,首先在中国英语学习者中进行了一次较大规模的实证调查,从实证角度验证了L2MSS理论对二语动机研究的有效性、优越性,并发现了在不同英语水平层次的学习者中,其“二语自我”(包括“二语理想自我”和“二语应该自我”。注：汉语译名转引自高一虹、周燕,2009)随英语水平的不同具有一定的规律,从而使本研究对L2MSS理论具有一定的贡献。之后,对大学非英语本科生进行了以基于提升“二语自我”为核心的教学干预的准实验研究。研究表明,该教学实验对“二语自我”、二语学习动机及二语成绩均有显著影响。
实证调查的研究问题有：(一)传统动机理论中的“融合型动机”与“二语理想自我”相比,哪个与“二语学习动机”相关性更大?(二)L2MSS理论将传统的“工具型动机”分为“促进型工具动机”和“预防型工具动机”。那么,对“工具型动机”的这种两分法是否能真正代表不同的概念?(三)在L2MSS理论模型的三个组成部分中,哪一个最能预测不同二语水平学习者的二语学习动机?(四)L2MSS理论的效度是否能在中国英语学习者中得到验证?进一步说,能否在不同二语水平的中国英语学习者中得到验证?(五)L2MSS理论模型的三个组成部分在不同二语水平的中国英语学习者中是否存在一定的模式?如果有,是什么规律?(六)在高中低二语水平的学习者中,其“二语理想自我”或“二语应该自我”是否有显著差别?(七)在高中低二语水平的学习者中,“二语自我”维度(包括“二语理想自我”和“二语应该自我”)与“二语学习体验”相比,其对“二语学习动机”的贡献有何不同之处?
准实验研究主要探讨以下五个问题：(一)基于提升“二语自我”为核心的教学干预(以下简称“教学干预”)是否能显著提高实验组的二语学习动机?(二)教学干预是否能显著提高实验组的二语学习成绩?(三)如果“教学干预”能够显著提高实验组的二语学习动机,那么该实验处理是否对高分组、低分组都有效?如果都有效,对哪一组效果更大?(四)如果“教学干预”能够显著提高实验组的二语学习成绩,那么该实验处理是否对高分组、低分组都有效?(五)“教学干预”对二语成绩的提升是否具有“时滞”效应?
在具体操作层面上,本文采用定量、定性相结合的研究方法,具体数据分析工具包括结构方程模型(SEM)拟合分析、零次相关及偏相关分析、回归分析、独立样本T检验、配对样本T检验、方差分析等。
本论文中实证调查部分的研究结果主要有：
(一)传统动机理论中的“融合型动机”与“二语理想自我”相比,后者与“二语学习动机”的相关性更大。(二)L2MSS理论将传统的“工具型动机”分为“促进型工具动机”和“预防型工具动机”。本研究的数据分析表明,对“工具型动机”的这种两分法代表的是不同“质”的概念。这两个对中国英语学习者的调查分析结果与同类前期研究成果(如Taguchi et al,2009；Ryan,2009；Csizer & Kormos,2009；Dornyei & Ushioda,2009)基本一致。这种两分法可以进一步加深我们对“工具型动机”的理解,尤其对外语学习环境下英语学习动机的研究有着重要意义。(三)对低水平二语学习者而言,“二语学习体验”最能预测二语学习动机的大小；对高水平二语学习者而言,“二语理想自我”最能预测二语学习动机的大小。(四)L2MSS理论的效度能够在中国英语学习者中得到验证。进一步说,也能在不同二语水平的中国英语学习者中得到验证。(五)L2MSS理论模型的三个组成部分在激发不同二语水平的学习者学习动机中所起的作用存在一定的规律。即,随着二语水平的提高,“二语自我”(包括“二语理想自我”和“二语应该自我”,特别是前者)对于二语学习动机的贡献越来越大；“二语学习体验”则越来越小,尽管对“二语学习体验”的测量值本身未必低。
本论文中准实验教学干预研究部分的结果主要有：
(一)“教学干预”能够显著提高二语学习者的二语学习动机和二语水平。(二)“教学干预”在高分组、低分组中均能显著提高其二语学习动机。进一步比较两组发现,尽管低分组二语学习动机的提升幅度也是显著的,但高分组对二语学习动机的提升幅度比低分组要大。(三)在提高二语成绩方面,“教学干预”短期内对低分组的二语成绩影响较为显著,而对高分组的二语成绩影响不显著。但长期内考察,“教学干预”不但对低分组有效,对高分组也有效。换句话说,“教学干预”对高分组二语水平的提升具有“时滞”效应。
本论文对中国英语学习者二语学习动机研究具有以下几点贡献：
(一)实证调查表明,L2MSS理论可以作为对中国英语学习者二语学习动机进行研究的理论框架。(二)本论文采用的教学干预准实验研究探索了通过提升“二语自我”来提高二语学习动机和二语学习成绩的可能性。(三)基于理论和实证分析,本论文发现的一个规律在一个方面对L2MSS理论略有补充。即,随着二语水平的提高,“二语自我”(包括“二语理想自我”和“二语应该自我”,特别是前者)对于二语学习动机的贡献越来越大；“二语学习体验”对于二语学习动机的贡献则越来越小,尽管对“二语学习体验”的测量值本身未必低。(四)基于提升“二语自我”为核心的教学干预对高分组学生提高二语水平具有“时滞”效应：“教学干预”对高分组二语成绩的提高未必在短期内显现,而是在长远看更具有显著影响。
From the perspective of Dornyei's L2 Motivational Self System (L2MSS), which is the latest L2 motivation theory, this dissertation carries out two main studies. First, a survey is carried out in order to test whether it is valid to study the L2 learning motivation in the framework of L2MSS among Chinese learners of English; second, after testing the validity of L2MSS theoretically and empirically, this dissertation conducts a quasi-experimental research focusing on the self-based interventional treatment. It is found that L2MSS can guide L2 motivation research in China, and the self-based motivational intervention in practical L2 learning and teaching can both promote L2 learning motivation and increase L2 proficiency level to some degree.
The survey study addresses the following specific research questions:(1) Compared with Integrativeness, does Ideal-L2-Self(IL2S) have more prominent correlation relation with L2 learners'L2 Learning Motivation (L2M)? (2) Are Instrumentality-promotion (IPRO) and Instrumentality-prevention (IPRE) two distinct constructs in terms of what they represent? (3) Among the three components of L2MSS, which can best predict students'L2 learning motivation at different L2 proficiency levels? (4) Can Dornyei's L2MSS be validated empirically in the study of L2 learners of English in China? More specifically, can L2MSS be applied to the study of Chinese learners of English at different L2 proficiency levels? (5) What is the pattern, if any, shown through the parameters of the three internal components of L2MSS across various groups of students at different proficiency levels? (6) Are there significant differences in Ideal-L2-Self, Ought-to-L2-Self among high-, mid-and low-level L2 proficiency sub-groups? (7) In high-, mid-and low-level L2 proficiency sub-groups, do the self dimension (IL2S and OL2S) and SLLE play different roles in contributing to their L2M?
The quasi-experimental study addresses the following five questions:(1) Can the instructional intervention on students'future-oriented L2 self improve their L2 motivation significantly? (2) Can the instructional intervention on students'future-oriented L2 self improve their L2 achievements significantly? (3) If the self-based interventional treatment is effective in improving the L2 motivation, then is it effective for the high-or low-level L2 proficiency sub-groups or for both? And if both, for which sub-group is the self-based interventional treatment more effective? (4) If the self-based interventional treatment is effective in improving the L2 proficiency, then is it effective for both the high-and low-level L2 proficiency sub-group? (5) Does the self-based interventional treatment have time-lag effects on the long-term L2 proficiency outcome?
On the operational level, this dissertation adopts both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Specifically, the data analysis tools include Structural Equation Model (SEM) fitting analysis, zero order and partial correlation analyses, regression analysis, independent samples T-test, paired samples T-test, ANOVA analysis, etc.
The results are as follows:
(1) Compared with Integrativeness, Ideal-L2-Self has more prominent correlation relation with L2 learners'L2 Learning Motivation in the context of L2 learning among Chinese learners of English.
(2) Traditional motive of Instrumentality can be divided into Instrumentality-promotion and Instrumentality-prevention and they are distinct constructs in terms of what they represent in the context of L2 learning among Chinese learners of English. The finding, which is especially significant in EFL context, can facilitate our understanding of the L2 learning Instrumental Motive. The two findings above are consistent with some earlier similar studies (e.g. Taguchi et al,2009; Csizer & Kormos,2009; Ryan,2009; Dornyei & Ushioda,2009). So it can be seen that Dornyei's L2MSS can be applied in many different contexts of L2 learning.
(3) For lower-level L2 proficiency learners, the best predictor of L2M is SLLE, but for higher-level L2 proficiency learners, IL2S is the best predictor of L2M.
(4) Dornyei's L2MSS can be validated empirically in the study of learners of English at different proficiency levels in China.
(5) With the increase of English proficiency, the self dimension (the OL2S and the IL2S, and the IL2S in particular) plays a more and more important role in its contribution to L2M of L2 learners while the SLLE plays a less and less important role.
(6) The L2 motivational self-based interventional treatment can enhance learners'L2 motivation and improve their L2 proficiency level significantly.
(7) The self-based interventional treatment can be effective in improving the L2 motivation both for the high-and low-level L2 proficiency sub-groups. Furthermore, there are more gains of the effect on improving the L2 motivation for the high-level L2 proficiency sub-group than for the low-level one, though it is also significantly effective for the latter.
(8) In the relatively short term, the self-based interventional treatment is more influential in improving L2 proficiency for the low-level L2 proficiency sub-group, but not for the high-level L2 proficiency sub-group, whereas in the relatively long term, the self-based interventional treatment is influential in improving L2 proficiency not only for the low-level L2 proficiency sub-group, but also for the high-level L2 proficiency sub-group. In other words, the self-based interventional treatment has "time-lag effects" on the subjects'L2 proficiency level for the high-level L2 proficiency sub-group. In summary, the following points make some contributions to the research literature of
L2 motivation in China:
(1) L2 motivation research can be conducted in the framework of L2MSS theory among Chinese learners of English. (2) The teaching intervention of the future-oriented self can contribute to the L2 learners'motivation enhancement and their L2 proficiency promotion. (3) Among learners at higher L2 proficiency levels, the L2 self dimension (IL2S & OL2S and the IL2S in particular) plays a more important role in its contribution to L2 Learning Motivation (L2M) while SLLE plays a less important role, though the absolute descriptive measurement of SLLE itself is not necessarily lower at the same time. (4) The present research has found the "time-lag effects" of the self-based interventional treatment. That is, the effect of the self-based interventional treatment on the L2 proficiency may not be significantly obvious immediately for higher-level L2 proficiency sub-group. Instead it will emerge in the longer term.
实证调查的研究问题有：(一)传统动机理论中的“融合型动机”与“二语理想自我”相比,哪个与“二语学习动机”相关性更大?(二)L2MSS理论将传统的“工具型动机”分为“促进型工具动机”和“预防型工具动机”。那么,对“工具型动机”的这种两分法是否能真正代表不同的概念?(三)在L2MSS理论模型的三个组成部分中,哪一个最能预测不同二语水平学习者的二语学习动机?(四)L2MSS理论的效度是否能在中国英语学习者中得到验证?进一步说,能否在不同二语水平的中国英语学习者中得到验证?(五)L2MSS理论模型的三个组成部分在不同二语水平的中国英语学习者中是否存在一定的模式?如果有,是什么规律?(六)在高中低二语水平的学习者中,其“二语理想自我”或“二语应该自我”是否有显著差别?(七)在高中低二语水平的学习者中,“二语自我”维度(包括“二语理想自我”和“二语应该自我”)与“二语学习体验”相比,其对“二语学习动机”的贡献有何不同之处?
准实验研究主要探讨以下五个问题：(一)基于提升“二语自我”为核心的教学干预(以下简称“教学干预”)是否能显著提高实验组的二语学习动机?(二)教学干预是否能显著提高实验组的二语学习成绩?(三)如果“教学干预”能够显著提高实验组的二语学习动机,那么该实验处理是否对高分组、低分组都有效?如果都有效,对哪一组效果更大?(四)如果“教学干预”能够显著提高实验组的二语学习成绩,那么该实验处理是否对高分组、低分组都有效?(五)“教学干预”对二语成绩的提升是否具有“时滞”效应?
在具体操作层面上,本文采用定量、定性相结合的研究方法,具体数据分析工具包括结构方程模型(SEM)拟合分析、零次相关及偏相关分析、回归分析、独立样本T检验、配对样本T检验、方差分析等。
本论文中实证调查部分的研究结果主要有：
(一)传统动机理论中的“融合型动机”与“二语理想自我”相比,后者与“二语学习动机”的相关性更大。(二)L2MSS理论将传统的“工具型动机”分为“促进型工具动机”和“预防型工具动机”。本研究的数据分析表明,对“工具型动机”的这种两分法代表的是不同“质”的概念。这两个对中国英语学习者的调查分析结果与同类前期研究成果(如Taguchi et al,2009；Ryan,2009；Csizer & Kormos,2009；Dornyei & Ushioda,2009)基本一致。这种两分法可以进一步加深我们对“工具型动机”的理解,尤其对外语学习环境下英语学习动机的研究有着重要意义。(三)对低水平二语学习者而言,“二语学习体验”最能预测二语学习动机的大小；对高水平二语学习者而言,“二语理想自我”最能预测二语学习动机的大小。(四)L2MSS理论的效度能够在中国英语学习者中得到验证。进一步说,也能在不同二语水平的中国英语学习者中得到验证。(五)L2MSS理论模型的三个组成部分在激发不同二语水平的学习者学习动机中所起的作用存在一定的规律。即,随着二语水平的提高,“二语自我”(包括“二语理想自我”和“二语应该自我”,特别是前者)对于二语学习动机的贡献越来越大；“二语学习体验”则越来越小,尽管对“二语学习体验”的测量值本身未必低。
本论文中准实验教学干预研究部分的结果主要有：
(一)“教学干预”能够显著提高二语学习者的二语学习动机和二语水平。(二)“教学干预”在高分组、低分组中均能显著提高其二语学习动机。进一步比较两组发现,尽管低分组二语学习动机的提升幅度也是显著的,但高分组对二语学习动机的提升幅度比低分组要大。(三)在提高二语成绩方面,“教学干预”短期内对低分组的二语成绩影响较为显著,而对高分组的二语成绩影响不显著。但长期内考察,“教学干预”不但对低分组有效,对高分组也有效。换句话说,“教学干预”对高分组二语水平的提升具有“时滞”效应。
本论文对中国英语学习者二语学习动机研究具有以下几点贡献：
(一)实证调查表明,L2MSS理论可以作为对中国英语学习者二语学习动机进行研究的理论框架。(二)本论文采用的教学干预准实验研究探索了通过提升“二语自我”来提高二语学习动机和二语学习成绩的可能性。(三)基于理论和实证分析,本论文发现的一个规律在一个方面对L2MSS理论略有补充。即,随着二语水平的提高,“二语自我”(包括“二语理想自我”和“二语应该自我”,特别是前者)对于二语学习动机的贡献越来越大；“二语学习体验”对于二语学习动机的贡献则越来越小,尽管对“二语学习体验”的测量值本身未必低。(四)基于提升“二语自我”为核心的教学干预对高分组学生提高二语水平具有“时滞”效应：“教学干预”对高分组二语成绩的提高未必在短期内显现,而是在长远看更具有显著影响。
From the perspective of Dornyei's L2 Motivational Self System (L2MSS), which is the latest L2 motivation theory, this dissertation carries out two main studies. First, a survey is carried out in order to test whether it is valid to study the L2 learning motivation in the framework of L2MSS among Chinese learners of English; second, after testing the validity of L2MSS theoretically and empirically, this dissertation conducts a quasi-experimental research focusing on the self-based interventional treatment. It is found that L2MSS can guide L2 motivation research in China, and the self-based motivational intervention in practical L2 learning and teaching can both promote L2 learning motivation and increase L2 proficiency level to some degree.
The survey study addresses the following specific research questions:(1) Compared with Integrativeness, does Ideal-L2-Self(IL2S) have more prominent correlation relation with L2 learners'L2 Learning Motivation (L2M)? (2) Are Instrumentality-promotion (IPRO) and Instrumentality-prevention (IPRE) two distinct constructs in terms of what they represent? (3) Among the three components of L2MSS, which can best predict students'L2 learning motivation at different L2 proficiency levels? (4) Can Dornyei's L2MSS be validated empirically in the study of L2 learners of English in China? More specifically, can L2MSS be applied to the study of Chinese learners of English at different L2 proficiency levels? (5) What is the pattern, if any, shown through the parameters of the three internal components of L2MSS across various groups of students at different proficiency levels? (6) Are there significant differences in Ideal-L2-Self, Ought-to-L2-Self among high-, mid-and low-level L2 proficiency sub-groups? (7) In high-, mid-and low-level L2 proficiency sub-groups, do the self dimension (IL2S and OL2S) and SLLE play different roles in contributing to their L2M?
The quasi-experimental study addresses the following five questions:(1) Can the instructional intervention on students'future-oriented L2 self improve their L2 motivation significantly? (2) Can the instructional intervention on students'future-oriented L2 self improve their L2 achievements significantly? (3) If the self-based interventional treatment is effective in improving the L2 motivation, then is it effective for the high-or low-level L2 proficiency sub-groups or for both? And if both, for which sub-group is the self-based interventional treatment more effective? (4) If the self-based interventional treatment is effective in improving the L2 proficiency, then is it effective for both the high-and low-level L2 proficiency sub-group? (5) Does the self-based interventional treatment have time-lag effects on the long-term L2 proficiency outcome?
On the operational level, this dissertation adopts both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Specifically, the data analysis tools include Structural Equation Model (SEM) fitting analysis, zero order and partial correlation analyses, regression analysis, independent samples T-test, paired samples T-test, ANOVA analysis, etc.
The results are as follows:
(1) Compared with Integrativeness, Ideal-L2-Self has more prominent correlation relation with L2 learners'L2 Learning Motivation in the context of L2 learning among Chinese learners of English.
(2) Traditional motive of Instrumentality can be divided into Instrumentality-promotion and Instrumentality-prevention and they are distinct constructs in terms of what they represent in the context of L2 learning among Chinese learners of English. The finding, which is especially significant in EFL context, can facilitate our understanding of the L2 learning Instrumental Motive. The two findings above are consistent with some earlier similar studies (e.g. Taguchi et al,2009; Csizer & Kormos,2009; Ryan,2009; Dornyei & Ushioda,2009). So it can be seen that Dornyei's L2MSS can be applied in many different contexts of L2 learning.
(3) For lower-level L2 proficiency learners, the best predictor of L2M is SLLE, but for higher-level L2 proficiency learners, IL2S is the best predictor of L2M.
(4) Dornyei's L2MSS can be validated empirically in the study of learners of English at different proficiency levels in China.
(5) With the increase of English proficiency, the self dimension (the OL2S and the IL2S, and the IL2S in particular) plays a more and more important role in its contribution to L2M of L2 learners while the SLLE plays a less and less important role.
(6) The L2 motivational self-based interventional treatment can enhance learners'L2 motivation and improve their L2 proficiency level significantly.
(7) The self-based interventional treatment can be effective in improving the L2 motivation both for the high-and low-level L2 proficiency sub-groups. Furthermore, there are more gains of the effect on improving the L2 motivation for the high-level L2 proficiency sub-group than for the low-level one, though it is also significantly effective for the latter.
(8) In the relatively short term, the self-based interventional treatment is more influential in improving L2 proficiency for the low-level L2 proficiency sub-group, but not for the high-level L2 proficiency sub-group, whereas in the relatively long term, the self-based interventional treatment is influential in improving L2 proficiency not only for the low-level L2 proficiency sub-group, but also for the high-level L2 proficiency sub-group. In other words, the self-based interventional treatment has "time-lag effects" on the subjects'L2 proficiency level for the high-level L2 proficiency sub-group. In summary, the following points make some contributions to the research literature of
L2 motivation in China:
(1) L2 motivation research can be conducted in the framework of L2MSS theory among Chinese learners of English. (2) The teaching intervention of the future-oriented self can contribute to the L2 learners'motivation enhancement and their L2 proficiency promotion. (3) Among learners at higher L2 proficiency levels, the L2 self dimension (IL2S & OL2S and the IL2S in particular) plays a more important role in its contribution to L2 Learning Motivation (L2M) while SLLE plays a less important role, though the absolute descriptive measurement of SLLE itself is not necessarily lower at the same time. (4) The present research has found the "time-lag effects" of the self-based interventional treatment. That is, the effect of the self-based interventional treatment on the L2 proficiency may not be significantly obvious immediately for higher-level L2 proficiency sub-group. Instead it will emerge in the longer term.
引文
Al-Shehri, A.S. (2009). Motivation and Vision:The Relation Between the Ideal L2 Self, Imagination and Visual Style. In Z. Dornyei and E. Ushioda (eds.). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. (pp.164-171). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms, goals, structures and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology,84(3),267-271.
Arbuckle, J.L. (2005). Amos 6.0 User's Guide. Spring House, PA:Amos Development Corporation.
Arnold, J., Puchta, H.,& Rinvolucri, M. (2007). Imagine that! Mental imagery in the EFL classroom. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological Review,64(6),359-372.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equation modeling with latent variables. New York: John Wiley.
Boyatzis, R.E.,& Akrivou, K. (2006). The ideal self as the driver of intentional change. Journal of Management Development,25 (7),624-642.
Browne, M.W.,& Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K.A. Bollen and J.S. Long (eds) Testing structural models (pp.136-162). Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
Byrne, B.M. (2001). Structural equation modelling with AMOS. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Clement, R.,& Kruidenier, B. G. (1983). Orientations in second language acquisition: I. The effects of ethnicity, milieu and target language on their emergence. Language Learning,33(3),273-291.
Corder, S.P. (1967). The significance of learners'errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics,5(4),161-169.
Csizer, K.,& Dornyei, Z. (2005). The internal structure of language learning motivation and its relationship with language choice and learning effort. Modern Language Journal,89,19-36.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a Global Language (2nd ed). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Csizer, K.& Kormos, J.(2009). Learning Experiences, Selves and Motivated Learning Behaviour:A Comparative Analysis of Structural Models for Hungarian Secondary and University Learners of English. In Z. Dornyei and E. Ushioda (eds.). Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self. (pp.98-119). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Deci, E. L.,& Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York:Plenum.
Deci, E. L.,& Ryan, R. M. (2002). Handbook of self-determination. Rochester: University of Rochester Press.
Denzin, N.K. (1989). The Research Act in Sociology:A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods (3rd ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
Dornyei, Z. (2000). Motivation in action:Towards a process-oriented conceptualization of student motivation. British Journal of Educational Psychology,70(4),519-538.
Dornyei, Z. (2001a). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dornyei, Z. (2001b). Teaching and research motivation. Harlow, UK:Pearson Education Ltd.
Dornyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner:Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, N.J.:Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dornyei, Z.,& Otto, I. (1998). Motivation in action:A process model of L2 motivation. Working Papers in Applied Linguistics (Thames Valley University, London), Vol.4. Thames Valley University, pp.43-69.
Dornyei, Z.,& Csiz'er, K. (2002). Some Dynamics of Language Attitudes and Motivation:Results of a Longitudinal Nationwide Survey. Applied Linguistics, 23(4),421-462.
Dornyei, Z., Csizer, K.& Nemeth, N. (2006). Motivation, language attitudes and globalisation:A Hungarian perspective. Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.
Dornyei, Z. (2009a). The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Dornyei, Z. (2009b).'The L2 Motivational Self System'in Z. Dornyei and E. Ushioda (eds.). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. (pp.9-42). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Dornyei, Z.& E. Ushioda (eds.).(2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Dornyei, Z.& E. Ushioda. (2009). Motivation, Language Identities and the L2 Self: Future Research Directions in Z. Dornyei & E. Ushioda (eds.). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp.350-356). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Dornyei, Z. (1994). Understanding L2 motivation:on with the challenge! The Modern Language Journal,78(4),515-523.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning:The role of attitudes and motivation. London:Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. C.,& Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational variables in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13(4),266-272.
Gardner, R. C.,& Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA:Newbury House.
Gardner, R. C., Masgoret, A.M., Tennant, J.,& Mihic, L. (2004). Integrative motivation:Changes during a year-long intermediate-level language course. Language Learning,54 (1),1-34
Gardner, R.C. (2001). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition. In Z. Dornyei and R. Schmidt (eds) Motivation and Second Language acquisition (pp. 1-19). Honolulu, HI:University of Hawaii Press.
Hu L-T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for indexes in covariance structure analysis:Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling:A Multidisciplinary Journal,6,1-55.
Higgins, E.T. (1987). Self-discrepancy:A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review,94,319-340.
Higgins, E.T. (1996). The'self-digest':Self-knowledge serving self-regulatory functions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,71(6),1062-1083.
Higgins, E.T. (1998). Promotion and prevention:Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,30,1-46.
Hock, M.F., Deshler, D.D.& Schumaker, J.B. (2006). Enhancing student motivation through the pursuit of possible selves. In C. Dunkel & J. Kerpelman (eds) Possible selves:Theory, research and application (pp.205-221). New York: Nova Science.
Hock, M.F., Schumaker, J.B.& Deshler, D.D. (2002). Draft of possible selves strategy instruction manual. Personal Communication.
Hoyle, R.H.,& Sherrill, M.R. (2006). Future orientations in the self-system:Possible selves, self-regulation, and Behavior. Journal of Personality,74(6),1673-1696.
Inbar, O., Donitsa-Schmidt, S.,& Shohamy, E. (2001). Students'motivation as a function of language learning:The teaching of Arabic in Israel. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition. Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
Lamb, M. (2004) Integrative motivation in a globalizing world. System,32,3-19.
Locke, E. A.,& Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
Locke, E.A., Shaw, K.N., Saari, L.M.,& Latham, G.P. (1981). Goal setting and task performance:1969-1980. Psychological Bulletin,90(1),125-152.
MacIntype, P.D., Mackinnon S.P.& Clement R. (2009). The Baby, the Bathwater, and the Future of Language Learning Motivation Research in Z. Dornyei and E. Ushioda (eds.). Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self. (pp.43-65). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Markus, H.R.,& Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist,41, 954-969.
Markus, H.R. (2006). Foreword. In C. Dunkel and J. Kerpelman (eds) Possible Selves: Theory, Research and Applications (pp. xi-xiv). New York:Nova Science.
Markus, H.R.,& Ruvolo, A. (1989). Possible selves:Personalized representations of goals. In L.A. Pervin (ed.) Goal Concepts in Personality and Social Psychology (pp.211-241). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
McClelland, N. (2000). Goal orientations in Japanese college students learning EFL. In S. D. Cornwell & P. Robinson (Eds.), Individual differences in foreign language learning:Effects of aptitude, intelligence, and motivation. (pp.99-115). Tokyo:Japanese Association for Language Teaching.
Mehrens, W.A.,& Lehmann, I. J. (1993). Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology. Chicago:Holt, Rinchart, and Winston.
Miller, R.B.,& Brickman, S.J. (2004). A model of future-oriented motivation and self-regulation. Educational Psychology Review, 16 (1),9-33.
Modell, A. H. (2003). Imagination and the Meaningful Brain. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Noels, K.A., Pelletier, L.G., Clement, R.,& Vallerand, R.J. (2000). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language Learning,50,57-85.
Noels, K.A. (2001a). Learning Spanish as a second language:Students'orientations and perceptions of teachers'communicative style. Language Learning,51, 107-144.
Noels, K.A. (2001b). New orientations in language learning motivation:Towards a model of intrinsic, extrinsic and integrative orientations. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (eds) Motivation and Second Language Acquisition (pp.43-68). Honolulu, HI:University of Hawaii Press.
Nowak, A., R. R. Vallacher,& M. Zochowski. (2005).'The emergence of personality: Dynamic foundations of individual variation'. Developmental Review,25, 351-85.
Oyserman, D., Bybee, D.& Terry, K. (2006). Possible selves and academic outcomes: How and when possible selves impel action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,91(1),188-204.
Oyserman, D., Terry, K.& Bybee, D. (2002). A possible selves intervention to enhance school involvement. Journal of Adolescence,25,313-326.
Pintrich, P. R.,& Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education:Theory, research, and applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Merrill Prentice Hall.
Ryan, S. (2009). Self and Identity in L2 Motivation in Japan:The Ideal L2 Self and Japanese Learners of English. In Z. Dornyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self(pp.120-143). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Segal, H.G. (2006). Possible selves, fantasy distortion, and the anticipated life history: Exploring the role of imagination in social cognition. In C. Dunkel and J. Kerpelman (eds) Possible selves:Theory, research and applications (pp.79-96). New York:Nova Science.
Schumann, J. H. (2004a). Conclusion in J. H. Schumann, S. E. Crowell, N. E. Jones, N. Lee, S. A. Schuchert,& L. A. Wood (eds.). The neurobiology of learning: Perspectives from second language acquisition. (pp.175-180). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schumann, J. H. (2004b). Introduction in J. H. Schumann, S. E. Crowell, N. E. Jones, N. Lee, S. A. Schuchert,& L. A. Wood (eds.). The neurobiology of learning: Perspectives from second language acquisition. (pp.1-6). Mahwah, N.J. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2000). Linguistic genocide in education-or worldwide diversity and human rights? Mahwah:NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
Stern. H.H. (1999). Fundamental concepts of language teaching上海外语教育出版社,上海,p508.
Taguchi,T, Magid, M.& Papi, M. (2009). The L2 motivational self system among Japanese, Chinese and Iranian learners of English:A comparative study. In Z. Dornyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 66-97). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Ushioda, E. (2001). Language learning at university:Exploring the role of motivational thinking. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp.93-125). Hawaii:University of Hawaii Press.
Ushioda & Dornyei. (2009). Motivation, Language Identities and the L2 Self:A Theoretical Overview. In Z. Dornyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp.1-8). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Wigfield, A.,& Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology,25 (1),68-81.
Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer.
Weiner, B. (1992). Human motivation:Metaphors, theories, and research. Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
Warden and Lin. (2000). Existence of integrative motivation in Asian EFL setting. Foreign Language Annals,33(5),535-545.
Tseng, W,& Schmitt. (2008). Toward a Model of Motivated Vocabulary Learning:A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Language Learning,58(2),359
Wen Q.F. (2001b). Applied linguistics:Research method and thesis writing. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice:Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Widdowson, H.G. (1994). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly,28(2), 377-389.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice:Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Williams, M.,& Burden, R. (1997). Psychology for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wintergerst, A.C., A. Decapua,& R.C. Itzen. (2001). The construct validity of one learning style instrument. System,29,385-403.
Yashima, T. (2000). Orientations and motivation in foreign language learning:A study of Japanese college students. JACET Bulletin,31,121-133.
Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language:The Japanese context. Modern Language Journal,86 (1),54-66.
Yashima, T. (2009). International posture and the ideal L2 self in the Japanese EFL context. in Z. Dornyei,& E. Ushioda (eds.).Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. (pp.144-163). Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.
Yowell, C.M. (2002). Dreams of the future:The pursuit of education and career possible selves among ninth grade Latino youth. Applied Developmental Science, 6(2),62-72.
Zentner, M.,& Renaud,O. (2007). Origins of adolescents'ideal self:An intergenerational perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3),557-574.
高一虹、赵媛、程英、周燕,中国大学本科生英语学习动机类型,《现代外语》,2003a(1),pp.29-38
高一虹、程英、赵媛、周燕,英语学习动机类型与动机强度的关系——对大学本科生的定量考察, 《外语研究》,2003b(1),pp.60-64
高一虹、赵媛、程英、周燕,大学本科生英语学习动机类型与自我认同变化的关系, 《国外外语教学》,2002(4),pp.18-24
高一虹、周燕,二语习得社会心理研究：心理学派与社会文化学派,《外语学刊》2009(1),pp.123-128
郝玫、郝若平,英语成绩与成就动机、状态焦虑的相关研究, 《外语教学与研究》,2001(1),pp.111-115
侯杰泰、温忠麟、成子娟,2004, 《结构方程模型及其应用》[M].北京：教育科学出版社.
江晓红,成就动机和归因对英语学习策略选择的影响, 《解放军外国语学院学报》,2003(2),pp.69-72
林嵩,2008,《结构方程模型原理及AMOS应用》[M].武汉：华中师范大学出版社
马广惠,学习动机和努力程度对外语学习成绩的影响, 《解放军外国语学院学报》,2005(4),pp.37-41
秦晓晴、文秋芳,非英语专业大学生学习动机的内在结构,《外语教学与研究》,2002(1),pp.51-58
秦晓晴,2003,《外语教学研究中的定量数据分析》[M].武汉：华中科技大学出版社
秦晓晴,2007,《中国大学生外语学习动机研究》[M].北京：高等教育出版社
邱浩政、林碧芳,2009,《结构方程模型的原理与应用》[M].北京：中国轻工业出版社
文秋芳,英语学习者动机、观念、策略的变化规律与特点,《外语教学与研究》,2001a(2),pp.105-110
杨连瑞、李绍鹏,国外二语习得个体差异研究的新进展,《外语学刊》,2009(5),pp.147-151
易丹辉,2008,《结构方程模型方法与应用》[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社
邹申、彭康洲、孔文,应用EQS和BILOG分析TEM8人文知识项目的构念效度,《中国外语》,2009(1),pp.45-52
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms, goals, structures and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology,84(3),267-271.
Arbuckle, J.L. (2005). Amos 6.0 User's Guide. Spring House, PA:Amos Development Corporation.
Arnold, J., Puchta, H.,& Rinvolucri, M. (2007). Imagine that! Mental imagery in the EFL classroom. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological Review,64(6),359-372.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equation modeling with latent variables. New York: John Wiley.
Boyatzis, R.E.,& Akrivou, K. (2006). The ideal self as the driver of intentional change. Journal of Management Development,25 (7),624-642.
Browne, M.W.,& Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K.A. Bollen and J.S. Long (eds) Testing structural models (pp.136-162). Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
Byrne, B.M. (2001). Structural equation modelling with AMOS. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Clement, R.,& Kruidenier, B. G. (1983). Orientations in second language acquisition: I. The effects of ethnicity, milieu and target language on their emergence. Language Learning,33(3),273-291.
Corder, S.P. (1967). The significance of learners'errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics,5(4),161-169.
Csizer, K.,& Dornyei, Z. (2005). The internal structure of language learning motivation and its relationship with language choice and learning effort. Modern Language Journal,89,19-36.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a Global Language (2nd ed). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Csizer, K.& Kormos, J.(2009). Learning Experiences, Selves and Motivated Learning Behaviour:A Comparative Analysis of Structural Models for Hungarian Secondary and University Learners of English. In Z. Dornyei and E. Ushioda (eds.). Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self. (pp.98-119). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Deci, E. L.,& Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York:Plenum.
Deci, E. L.,& Ryan, R. M. (2002). Handbook of self-determination. Rochester: University of Rochester Press.
Denzin, N.K. (1989). The Research Act in Sociology:A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods (3rd ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
Dornyei, Z. (2000). Motivation in action:Towards a process-oriented conceptualization of student motivation. British Journal of Educational Psychology,70(4),519-538.
Dornyei, Z. (2001a). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dornyei, Z. (2001b). Teaching and research motivation. Harlow, UK:Pearson Education Ltd.
Dornyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner:Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, N.J.:Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dornyei, Z.,& Otto, I. (1998). Motivation in action:A process model of L2 motivation. Working Papers in Applied Linguistics (Thames Valley University, London), Vol.4. Thames Valley University, pp.43-69.
Dornyei, Z.,& Csiz'er, K. (2002). Some Dynamics of Language Attitudes and Motivation:Results of a Longitudinal Nationwide Survey. Applied Linguistics, 23(4),421-462.
Dornyei, Z., Csizer, K.& Nemeth, N. (2006). Motivation, language attitudes and globalisation:A Hungarian perspective. Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.
Dornyei, Z. (2009a). The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Dornyei, Z. (2009b).'The L2 Motivational Self System'in Z. Dornyei and E. Ushioda (eds.). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. (pp.9-42). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Dornyei, Z.& E. Ushioda (eds.).(2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Dornyei, Z.& E. Ushioda. (2009). Motivation, Language Identities and the L2 Self: Future Research Directions in Z. Dornyei & E. Ushioda (eds.). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp.350-356). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Dornyei, Z. (1994). Understanding L2 motivation:on with the challenge! The Modern Language Journal,78(4),515-523.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning:The role of attitudes and motivation. London:Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. C.,& Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational variables in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13(4),266-272.
Gardner, R. C.,& Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA:Newbury House.
Gardner, R. C., Masgoret, A.M., Tennant, J.,& Mihic, L. (2004). Integrative motivation:Changes during a year-long intermediate-level language course. Language Learning,54 (1),1-34
Gardner, R.C. (2001). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition. In Z. Dornyei and R. Schmidt (eds) Motivation and Second Language acquisition (pp. 1-19). Honolulu, HI:University of Hawaii Press.
Hu L-T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for indexes in covariance structure analysis:Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling:A Multidisciplinary Journal,6,1-55.
Higgins, E.T. (1987). Self-discrepancy:A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review,94,319-340.
Higgins, E.T. (1996). The'self-digest':Self-knowledge serving self-regulatory functions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,71(6),1062-1083.
Higgins, E.T. (1998). Promotion and prevention:Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,30,1-46.
Hock, M.F., Deshler, D.D.& Schumaker, J.B. (2006). Enhancing student motivation through the pursuit of possible selves. In C. Dunkel & J. Kerpelman (eds) Possible selves:Theory, research and application (pp.205-221). New York: Nova Science.
Hock, M.F., Schumaker, J.B.& Deshler, D.D. (2002). Draft of possible selves strategy instruction manual. Personal Communication.
Hoyle, R.H.,& Sherrill, M.R. (2006). Future orientations in the self-system:Possible selves, self-regulation, and Behavior. Journal of Personality,74(6),1673-1696.
Inbar, O., Donitsa-Schmidt, S.,& Shohamy, E. (2001). Students'motivation as a function of language learning:The teaching of Arabic in Israel. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition. Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
Lamb, M. (2004) Integrative motivation in a globalizing world. System,32,3-19.
Locke, E. A.,& Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
Locke, E.A., Shaw, K.N., Saari, L.M.,& Latham, G.P. (1981). Goal setting and task performance:1969-1980. Psychological Bulletin,90(1),125-152.
MacIntype, P.D., Mackinnon S.P.& Clement R. (2009). The Baby, the Bathwater, and the Future of Language Learning Motivation Research in Z. Dornyei and E. Ushioda (eds.). Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self. (pp.43-65). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Markus, H.R.,& Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist,41, 954-969.
Markus, H.R. (2006). Foreword. In C. Dunkel and J. Kerpelman (eds) Possible Selves: Theory, Research and Applications (pp. xi-xiv). New York:Nova Science.
Markus, H.R.,& Ruvolo, A. (1989). Possible selves:Personalized representations of goals. In L.A. Pervin (ed.) Goal Concepts in Personality and Social Psychology (pp.211-241). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
McClelland, N. (2000). Goal orientations in Japanese college students learning EFL. In S. D. Cornwell & P. Robinson (Eds.), Individual differences in foreign language learning:Effects of aptitude, intelligence, and motivation. (pp.99-115). Tokyo:Japanese Association for Language Teaching.
Mehrens, W.A.,& Lehmann, I. J. (1993). Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology. Chicago:Holt, Rinchart, and Winston.
Miller, R.B.,& Brickman, S.J. (2004). A model of future-oriented motivation and self-regulation. Educational Psychology Review, 16 (1),9-33.
Modell, A. H. (2003). Imagination and the Meaningful Brain. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Noels, K.A., Pelletier, L.G., Clement, R.,& Vallerand, R.J. (2000). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language Learning,50,57-85.
Noels, K.A. (2001a). Learning Spanish as a second language:Students'orientations and perceptions of teachers'communicative style. Language Learning,51, 107-144.
Noels, K.A. (2001b). New orientations in language learning motivation:Towards a model of intrinsic, extrinsic and integrative orientations. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (eds) Motivation and Second Language Acquisition (pp.43-68). Honolulu, HI:University of Hawaii Press.
Nowak, A., R. R. Vallacher,& M. Zochowski. (2005).'The emergence of personality: Dynamic foundations of individual variation'. Developmental Review,25, 351-85.
Oyserman, D., Bybee, D.& Terry, K. (2006). Possible selves and academic outcomes: How and when possible selves impel action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,91(1),188-204.
Oyserman, D., Terry, K.& Bybee, D. (2002). A possible selves intervention to enhance school involvement. Journal of Adolescence,25,313-326.
Pintrich, P. R.,& Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education:Theory, research, and applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Merrill Prentice Hall.
Ryan, S. (2009). Self and Identity in L2 Motivation in Japan:The Ideal L2 Self and Japanese Learners of English. In Z. Dornyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self(pp.120-143). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Segal, H.G. (2006). Possible selves, fantasy distortion, and the anticipated life history: Exploring the role of imagination in social cognition. In C. Dunkel and J. Kerpelman (eds) Possible selves:Theory, research and applications (pp.79-96). New York:Nova Science.
Schumann, J. H. (2004a). Conclusion in J. H. Schumann, S. E. Crowell, N. E. Jones, N. Lee, S. A. Schuchert,& L. A. Wood (eds.). The neurobiology of learning: Perspectives from second language acquisition. (pp.175-180). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schumann, J. H. (2004b). Introduction in J. H. Schumann, S. E. Crowell, N. E. Jones, N. Lee, S. A. Schuchert,& L. A. Wood (eds.). The neurobiology of learning: Perspectives from second language acquisition. (pp.1-6). Mahwah, N.J. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2000). Linguistic genocide in education-or worldwide diversity and human rights? Mahwah:NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
Stern. H.H. (1999). Fundamental concepts of language teaching上海外语教育出版社,上海,p508.
Taguchi,T, Magid, M.& Papi, M. (2009). The L2 motivational self system among Japanese, Chinese and Iranian learners of English:A comparative study. In Z. Dornyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 66-97). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Ushioda, E. (2001). Language learning at university:Exploring the role of motivational thinking. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp.93-125). Hawaii:University of Hawaii Press.
Ushioda & Dornyei. (2009). Motivation, Language Identities and the L2 Self:A Theoretical Overview. In Z. Dornyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp.1-8). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Wigfield, A.,& Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology,25 (1),68-81.
Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer.
Weiner, B. (1992). Human motivation:Metaphors, theories, and research. Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
Warden and Lin. (2000). Existence of integrative motivation in Asian EFL setting. Foreign Language Annals,33(5),535-545.
Tseng, W,& Schmitt. (2008). Toward a Model of Motivated Vocabulary Learning:A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Language Learning,58(2),359
Wen Q.F. (2001b). Applied linguistics:Research method and thesis writing. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice:Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Widdowson, H.G. (1994). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly,28(2), 377-389.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice:Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Williams, M.,& Burden, R. (1997). Psychology for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wintergerst, A.C., A. Decapua,& R.C. Itzen. (2001). The construct validity of one learning style instrument. System,29,385-403.
Yashima, T. (2000). Orientations and motivation in foreign language learning:A study of Japanese college students. JACET Bulletin,31,121-133.
Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language:The Japanese context. Modern Language Journal,86 (1),54-66.
Yashima, T. (2009). International posture and the ideal L2 self in the Japanese EFL context. in Z. Dornyei,& E. Ushioda (eds.).Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. (pp.144-163). Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.
Yowell, C.M. (2002). Dreams of the future:The pursuit of education and career possible selves among ninth grade Latino youth. Applied Developmental Science, 6(2),62-72.
Zentner, M.,& Renaud,O. (2007). Origins of adolescents'ideal self:An intergenerational perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3),557-574.
高一虹、赵媛、程英、周燕,中国大学本科生英语学习动机类型,《现代外语》,2003a(1),pp.29-38
高一虹、程英、赵媛、周燕,英语学习动机类型与动机强度的关系——对大学本科生的定量考察, 《外语研究》,2003b(1),pp.60-64
高一虹、赵媛、程英、周燕,大学本科生英语学习动机类型与自我认同变化的关系, 《国外外语教学》,2002(4),pp.18-24
高一虹、周燕,二语习得社会心理研究：心理学派与社会文化学派,《外语学刊》2009(1),pp.123-128
郝玫、郝若平,英语成绩与成就动机、状态焦虑的相关研究, 《外语教学与研究》,2001(1),pp.111-115
侯杰泰、温忠麟、成子娟,2004, 《结构方程模型及其应用》[M].北京：教育科学出版社.
江晓红,成就动机和归因对英语学习策略选择的影响, 《解放军外国语学院学报》,2003(2),pp.69-72
林嵩,2008,《结构方程模型原理及AMOS应用》[M].武汉：华中师范大学出版社
马广惠,学习动机和努力程度对外语学习成绩的影响, 《解放军外国语学院学报》,2005(4),pp.37-41
秦晓晴、文秋芳,非英语专业大学生学习动机的内在结构,《外语教学与研究》,2002(1),pp.51-58
秦晓晴,2003,《外语教学研究中的定量数据分析》[M].武汉：华中科技大学出版社
秦晓晴,2007,《中国大学生外语学习动机研究》[M].北京：高等教育出版社
邱浩政、林碧芳,2009,《结构方程模型的原理与应用》[M].北京：中国轻工业出版社
文秋芳,英语学习者动机、观念、策略的变化规律与特点,《外语教学与研究》,2001a(2),pp.105-110
杨连瑞、李绍鹏,国外二语习得个体差异研究的新进展,《外语学刊》,2009(5),pp.147-151
易丹辉,2008,《结构方程模型方法与应用》[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社
邹申、彭康洲、孔文,应用EQS和BILOG分析TEM8人文知识项目的构念效度,《中国外语》,2009(1),pp.45-52