Investigating the Socio-Educational Model of

Foreign Language Motivation in Japan:

A Synthesis of Research

Chika KOJIMA TAKAHASHI

Abstract: This study reports on a synthesis of studies on foreign

language motivation among Japanese learners of English using the
socio-educational model (Gardner, 1985, 2001). Some researchers
have suggested that the socio-educational model is not applicable in
contexts where English is a foreign language, including Japan. This is
because English is a primary international language and may have no
specific target language community in learners minds, which poses
challenges for Gardners idea of integrativeness. The present study is
a research synthesis that attempts to investigate the ways in which this
model has been utilized and the applicability of the model in Japan.
Thirty-four unique studies in Japanese as well as non-Japanese journals
and books were synthesized. The results suggested that the majority of
studies investigated participants reasons for learning English, and in
some cases when factor analysis was performed one factor was made
up of both integrative and instrumental orientations, precluding a
distinction. On the other hand the relationships between orientations,
motivation and foreign language achievement were not thoroughly
investigated and varied to a great extent. The paper discusses these
varying results and what we can learn from the model.

1. Introduction
One of the so-called individual difference variables in second language (L2) acquisition
which has widely been researched is L2 motivation. Motivation involves the direction and
magnitude of human behaviour (Drnyei & Ushioda, 2011, p.4, original emphasis), and L2
motivation plays an important role in L2 learning. Up until the early 1990s the dominant

53

ICR

54

Chika KOJIMA TAKAHASHI

model was the socio-educational model (Gardner, 1985, 2001). At the heart of this model is
the construct of integrative motivation, which is defined as a motivation to learn a second
language because of positive feelings toward the community that speaks that language
(Gardner, 1985, pp.82-83). This construct consists of integrativeness, attitudes toward the
learning situation, and motivation (quantity). Integrativeness refers to a genuine interest
in learning the second language in order to come closer to the other language community
(Gardner, 2001, p.5), and is comprised of interest in foreign languages, attitudes towards
the L2 community, and integrative orientation (reasons for learning an L2 that are related
to wanting to become similar to valued members of the target language community).
Although Gardners main argument was that integrative motivation was one of the most
important constructs closely related to L2 achievement, his model was popular mainly
because of a contrast the model made between integrative orientation and instrumental
orientation (ones pragmatic reasons for learning an L2, such as getting a better job).
Various empirical studies have been conducted to date (e.g., Gardner, 1985; Gardner,
Tremblay, & Masgoret, 1997).
In recent years, a considerable amount of research on L2 motivation has been
conducted in English as a foreign language (EFL) contexts, where learners study a
language not typically spoken where they live (Drnyei & Ushioda, 2011). As researchers
applied the socio-educational model to EFL contexts, they realized the limitations of
integrativeness. That is, English is now considered the primary international language,
and for learners in EFL contexts this means that there is no specific target L2 community,
which undermines Gardners idea of integrativeness. This shift in theoretical trends in the
international community of L2 motivation researchers has also been felt in Japan, where
research adopting Gardners socio-educational model has been gradually accumulating, yet
often yielding inconclusive results. But given that the Gardnerian research accumulated in
Japan is by now substantial, the timing seems ripe for a critical examination of the model
before totally abandoning it.
The present study is an attempt to answer how this model has been utilized and
whether indeed this model is inapplicable in Japan. In order to answer these questions
the methodology of research synthesis (Ortega, 2010) was used. Unlike a single primary
research project with a limited number of participants, a systematic synthesis should
provide accumulated findings, the general applicability of an L2 motivation model in a
given context, and directions for future research.

2. Method
(1) Literature Retrieval
The literature included in this synthesis consisted of articles and book chapters
investigating L2 motivation in the socio-educational model in Japan and published between
1985, when Gardners Social Psychology and Second Language Learning was published, and
2010. While synthesists find it advisable to include the so-called gray literature (e.g.,

Investigating the Socio-Educational Model of Foreign Language Motivation in Japan

Rothstein, Sutton, & Borenstein, 2005), I decided to confine the synthesis to published
studies in order to achieve an accurate synthesis of exactly those findings from those
studies that are published and reported, and that therefore in many ways define this
research domain (Norris & Ortega, 2000, p.432). In order to retrieve relevant articles, I
employed the following two strategies of literature retrieval.
The first stage was screening four literature databases, as shown in Table 1. I first
conducted keyword searches using the following word combinations: motivation, Japan,
language, and English. Several steps were necessary for retrieving relevant studies. First,
since studies on chimpanzees came up in the search results, the word chimpanzees was
added as an exclusion word. Second, some researchers have investigated what demotivates,
rather than motivates, L2 learners. These studies work within a different framework from
the socio-educational model and thus the keywords demotivation and demotivator were
added as exclusion words. Third, I did not include dissertations or masters theses. Thus,
the keyword dissertation was added as an exclusion word. For the database in Japan (i.e.,
CiNii), only the words motivation, English, and language were used because it was
obvious that studies focused on Japan and it was not possible to add exclusion words.
Table 1

Online Database Search Results

(motivation) AND (Japan) AND (language)

ERIC

LLBA

PsycInfo

CiNii
(Eng.)

CiNii
(Jpn.)

Total
without
overlap

18 (70)

47

14 (72)

---

---

76

---

15(56)

8(17)

(138)

AND (English) NOT (chimpanzees) NOT

(demotivation) NOT (demotivator) NOT
(dissertation)
(motivation) AND (English) AND (language)

---

---

Note: Numbers in the parentheses indicate the initial numbers of studies identified, before excluding studies obviously
not related to L2 motivation or the socio-educational model. ERIC=Education Resources Information Center,
LLBA=Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts, CiNii =National Institute of Informatics Scholarly and Academic
Information Navigator in Japan.

I then examined the titles and the abstracts of each study, and excluded studies that
clearly did not focus on L2 motivation or on the socio-educational model. This electronic
search stage of the literature retrieval process resulted in the total of 76 potentially relevant
studies.
As a second stage, I pursued manual searches. First, I scanned the tables of contents of
back issues of the 17 journals in the field listed in Table 2 in search for additional relevant
study reports.

55

Chika KOJIMA TAKAHASHI

ICR

Table 2

Relevant Articles Found in Journals Through Manual Searches

Journal

Potentially relevant

Included in final synthesis

Applied Linguistics

Asian EFL Journal

English Language Teaching Journal

International Review of Applied Linguistics

10

JALT Journal

Japanese Psychological Research

JASTEC Journal

Language Education & Technology

Language Learning

Language Teaching Research

Modern Language Journal

RELC Journal

Studies in Second Language Acquisition

System

TESOL Quarterly

The Language Teacher

in Language Teaching
JACET Bulletin

56

Note. The numbers in this table represent unique hits not uncovered by the electronic searches.

I also retrieved articles cited in Irie (2003), which is a literature review of L2 motivation
studies in Japan covering articles published between 1990 and 2003. Next, I searched
in ProQuest for dissertations which focused on L2 motivation in Japan in order to refer
to their reference sections and search for studies that may be relevant. By screening the
ProQuest database with the same keywords that I used for database search I found a total
of 28 dissertations. Of these, four dissertations dealt with L2 motivation among Japanese
learners of English (Aloiau, 2001; Irie, 2005; Mori, 2002a; Pease, 2006). I checked the
reference sections of these four dissertations for relevant studies. I concluded the manual
search stage with a final thorough check of the reference sections from each of these
studies for further candidates. In the end, I found an additional 65 articles with the four
manual search strategies described above, which I added to the 76 articles found by the
electronic database searches.

Investigating the Socio-Educational Model of Foreign Language Motivation in Japan

(2) The Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

After the total 141 studies were retrieved, a systematic process of determining the
eligibility of studies began. To be included in the synthesis, first a study of course needed
to focus on L2 motivation. Second, the study needed to be a primary research report,
which excluded reviews. Third, it had to be conducted in Japan, not just with participants
who were Japanese, because I considered that contextual factors were likely to influence
L2 learners motivation. Thus, studies that focused, for example, on Japanese learners in
the study-abroad context were excluded. Fourth, I decided that a study needed to employ
the questionnaire method so that the data type would be comparable across studies. Fifth,
studies needed to work within the framework of the socio-educational model, excluding
studies using other models. Finally, I included only those studies that at least measured
integrative orientation. This is because the main criticism of the socio-educational model
is that researchers found mixed results on integrative orientation in Japan (Irie, 2003) and
that this orientation is irrelevant when English is perceived as an international language.
In other words, evidence bearing on integrative orientation is an essential factor when
examining the applicability of the socio-educational model. Thus, I excluded, for example,
studies that investigated only instrumental orientation or only motivational intensity
and desire to learn English. In the end, forty reports remained as the candidates for the
synthesis, 34 of which were independent studies.
57

(3) Coding Procedures

After retrieving and selecting the studies that met my inclusion criteria, I proceeded to
code and classify the 34 sample studies according to different features.
One salient feature I noticed when reviewing each study was that not many studies
used the full version of Gardners test battery, Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB). I
found great diversity in what individual researchers reported regarding questionnaire items
and any underlying constructs measured by them. For example, some mentioned that they
directly adopted and translated items from the AMTB. Others mentioned that they worked
within the socio-educational model but did not mention whether they directly applied the
items from the AMTB, or if they created items of their own. Thus, in order to accommodate
such diversity, I classified studies according to the variables they seemed to measure.
For those studies that included correlations between at least integrative orientation
(plus possibly other motivational variables) and L2 achievement/proficiency variables, I
coded those correlations for quantitative meta-analysis. This was to examine the extent
to which motivational variables, in particular integrative orientation, were related to L2
achievement.

3. Results
Because of space limitations I only discuss some key features of the synthesis here.

Chika KOJIMA TAKAHASHI

ICR

(1) Methodological Features

Table 3 shows that about 71% of the studies investigated L2 motivation among
university students. However, given Japanese learners exam-oriented reasons for learning
English (Berwick & Ross, 1989), more studies should be conducted with high school
students, who study towards university entrance exams. Furthermore, given that compulsory
foreign language activities started in 2011, studies with elementary school students will be
promising in the coming years.
Table 3

Publication and Sample Characteristics

Study feature

Code

Publication year

1985-1990

1991-1995

1996-2000

2000-2005

10

2006-2010

International journals

Publication type

Japanese journals

58

Institutional level

25

Others

Elementary school

Junior high school

High school

Junior college/ university

Sample size

# Studies

24

Other

Mean

294.18

Max

1417

Min

34

Standard deviation

306.89

(2) Substantive Features

By examining what constructs were investigated, as presented in Table 4, I found the
following three patterns: (a) the majority of studies, or 67.4%, investigated integrative
and instrumental orientations; (b) a few studies, or 26.5%, simultaneously investigated
integrative orientation, instrumental orientation, and motivational intensity; and (c)
the investigation of only integrative orientation and motivation or of only integrative
orientation was practically non-existing (with one study in each category). As explained

Investigating the Socio-Educational Model of Foreign Language Motivation in Japan

earlier, Gardner made a distinction between motivation and orientation, each meaning
motivational intensity or amount of effort and reasons for studying an L2. In other words,
the model postulated that motivation was made up of both quantity and quality. However,
approximately 71% of the studies did not include items on motivational quantity.
Table 4

Study Characteristics
Study feature

Code

Construct(s)
integrative orientation
plus:

Instrumental orientation: y, motivation: y

Instrumental orientation: y, motivation: n

23

Instrumental orientation: n, motivation: y

Instrumental orientation: n, motivation: n

Research questions

Variable Type

# Studies

Identifying motivational bases

22

Investigating differences among groups

17

Investigating relationships with dependent variables

15

Investigating longitudinal change in motivation

Others

Motivation as independent variable

15

Motivation as dependent variable

19

Motivation neither as independent nor dependent variable

One possible reason for this trend is because of the researchers interests. Sixty-five
percent of the studies investigated the motivational bases among participants, examining
participants reasons for learning English, without much focus on how much effort
participants make in studying English. That is, there seems to be much more interest in
orientations than in motivational quantity, and so many researchers did not include items
on motivational quantity.
(3) Results Features
As can be seen in Table 5, most studies employed factor analysis, correlations, or
ANOVAs, with factor analysis being the one dominant statistical analysis performed in more
than half of the studies. This is understandable, considering that researchers have tried to
tap into what shapes L2 motivation among Japanese learners of English.

59

Chika KOJIMA TAKAHASHI

ICR

Table 5

Statistical Analysis Characteristics

Study feature

Code

Statistical Analysis

Purely descriptive
Correlational analysis

Factor Analysis: factor

loading from both integrative
& instrumental orientations?

60

# Studies
2
16

T-test

Chi-square test

Factor Analysis

22

ANOVA

11

MANOVA

Regression

Others

Yes

No

12

(4) Inspection of Results from Factor Analyses and Correlations

In order to examine the applicability of the socio-educational model in Japan, I
investigated the researchers findings by performing factor analysis. Researchers in
22 studies out of 34 (65%) performed factor analysis. Of these 22, 20 measured both
integrative and instrumental orientations. Eighteen out of the 20 studies analyzed the
results at item-level. Thus, I closely examined the factor analysis results in these 18 studies.
As shown in Table 6, in some studies one factor was made up of both integrative and
instrumental orientations, which could potentially be a sign of the inapplicability of the
model in Japan. Results should be interpreted cautiously, however, as there may be other
potential reasons for this pattern of factor loadings. First, many studies did not directly
employ the AMTB, but combined items from the socio-educational model and one or more
other models. Thus, the degree to which the various partial modifications of the AMTB
or new questionnaire items actually tapped into integrative and instrumental orientations
reliably and validly remains uncertain. Second, in factor analysis if certain items load highly
on one factor, it means that these items performed similarly for participants. Thus, the
fact that a factor was made up of both of the two orientations may also mean that these
orientations are still distinct and valid but that participants had similar levels of both of
these orientations. Thus, it is difficult to reach a definitive conclusion with regards to the
applicability of the model simply from the results of factor analyses attempted in Table 6.

Investigating the Socio-Educational Model of Foreign Language Motivation in Japan

Table 6

Results of Factor Analysis

Results (Yes: one factor was made
up of integrative & instrumental
orientations; No: no factor was
made up of these orientations)

Study

Measure

Purpose

Apple (2005)

AMTB

To answer RQ

No

Koga (2010)

Not AMTB

To validate the
questionnaire

No

Hojo (2000)

Not AMTB

To answer RQ

No

Hojo (1998a)

Not AMTB

To answer RQ

Yes

Hojo (1998b)

Not AMTB

To answer RQ

No

Hojo (1997)

Not AMTB

To answer RQ

No

Takanashi (1992)

AMTB

To answer RQ

No

Takanashi (1994)

AMTB

To answer RQ

No

Kimura, Nakata, &

Okumura (2001)

Not AMTB

To answer RQ

Yes

Koizumi & Matsuo (1993)

Not AMTB

To answer RQ

Yes

Konishi (1990)

Not AMTB

To answer RQ

No

Matsuoka (2004)

Not AMTB

To answer RQ

Yes

Miyahara et al. (1997)

Not AMTB

To answer RQ

Integrative orientation did

not emerge

Neff (2007)

Not AMTB

To validate the
questionnaire

Yes

Tsuchihira (1993)

AMTB

To answer RQ

No

Koizumi & Kai (1992)

Not AMTB

To answer RQ

No

Yamamoto (1993)

Not AMTB

To answer RQ

No

Yashima (2000)

Partially AMTB

To answer RQ

No

In order to examine the relationships between motivational constructs and L2

achievement/proficiency scores I checked the correlations between them, as presented
in Table 7. It should be noted, however, that only four out of the ten studies had both
orientation and motivation variables as predictor variables. Thus, I decided that the
number of studies was too small to average the effect sizes and instead tried to conceptually
understand the numbers.
As presented in Table 7, the correlations do not seem to systematically differ
depending on whether one of the correlated variables represented integrative orientation,
instrumental orientation, or motivational intensity. The coefficients range from as low as
-.32 to as high as .42. The small number of studies that had both orientation and motivation
variables as predictor variables made it impossible to investigate Gardners main claim that

61

Chika KOJIMA TAKAHASHI

ICR

it is motivation, not orientation, which is highly related to L2 achievement. This is, however,
an important finding in that not many studies in Japan have directly tested the applicability
of the socio-educational model by examining at the same time the correlations of L2
achievement/proficiency scores with orientations and with motivation.
Table 7

Correlations Between Integrative Orientation, Instrumental Orientation, Motivation, and Dependent

Variables
Study

Correlation of achievement/proficiency scores with

integrative orientation

instrumental orientation

motivation

Brown et al. (2001)

320

- .05

- .13

.01

Koizumi & Kai (1992)

300

.10

.21

NA

41

.31

.42

NA

Takanashi (1991)

201

.24

- .32

NA

Takanashi (1992)

163

.05

.13

NA

Takanashi (1994)

169

.21

- .01

NA

Tsuchihira (1993)

96

.29

.16

.28

Yamamoto (1993)

268

.05

.38

NA

Yashima (2000)

372

.20

.31

.37

47

.26

.23

.22

Neff (2007)

62

Yoshitomi (1990)
Note: NA= not applicable

4. Discussion and Conclusion

This synthesis demonstrated that, although L2 motivation has widely been researched
in the Japanese context using the socio-educational model, the existing research has not
addressed the issue of the applicability of the model, and instead has utilized parts of the
model. The majority of the studies focused on instrumental and integrative orientations,
or the quality of motivation, and did not focus much on the quantity of motivation. The
distinction between integrative and instrumental orientations remains unclear, as can
be seen in the results of the factor analyses. Furthermore, there has not been much
examination of the relationship between L2 motivation and L2 achievement.
Even with these perplexing results there are things we can learn from the model. First,
as the model proposes, more should be investigated not only on the quality of motivation
but also on the quantity of motivation. This focus on the quality of L2 motivation is in
accordance with the trends in the wider community researching L2 motivation. That is,
there has been much research on L2 learners quality of motivation and/or the changes

Investigating the Socio-Educational Model of Foreign Language Motivation in Japan

in it, particularly by way of qualitative methods (e.g., Ushioda, 2001; Williams & Burden,
1999). However, the quantity of motivation is also important, and as the socio-educational
model proposes, ultimately we should examine the interrelationships among motivational
quantity, motivational quality, L2 achievement, and other surrounding variables.
Second, the application of the socio-educational model in EFL contexts, including
Japan, has led to the recent propositions of a motivational model as well as other
surrounding variables, including the L2 motivational self system (Drnyei, 2005, 2009) and
the variable of international posture (Yashima, 2002, 2009). In part this was made possible
because of the inconclusive results of the application of the socio-educational model, as
presented in this study. By building upon the socio-educational model, taking into account
the wider social contexts, as well as exploring the notion of self, future research on L2
motivation has the potential to demonstrate the dynamic interplays of individual and social
variables.

Studies Synthesized
Adachi,R. (2009). Motivation of young Japanese EFL learners and effect factors. JASTEC Journal, 28, 43-64.
Apple,M. T. (2005). Extensive reading and the motivation to read: A pilot study. Doshisha Studies in Language
and Culture, 8, 193-212.
Benson,M. J. (1991). Attitudes and motivation towards English: A survey of Japanese freshman. RELC
Journal, 22, 34-48.
Brown, J.D., Robson,G., & Rosenkjar,P.R. (2001). Personality, motivation, anxiety, strategies, and language
proficiency of Japanese students. In Z. Drnyei & R. Schmidt. (Eds.), Motivation and second language
acquisition (pp.361-398). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and
Curriculum Center.
Higuchi,T., Kunikata,T., Miura,I., Kitamura,T., Nakamoto,M., & Moriya,M. (1994). The effects of English
learning at an early stage on attitudes and motivation toward English and foreign language learning.
JASTEC Journal, 13, 35-48.
Hojo,R. (1997). A study of learning strategies used by Japanese EFL students (3). Bulletin of Joetsu University of
Education, 17, 269-281.
Hojo,R. (1998a). A study of learning strategies used by Japanese EFL students (5). Bulletin of Joetsu University
of Education, 18, 219-231.
Hojo,R. (1998b). A study of learning strategies used by Japanese EFL students (4). Bulletin of Joetsu University
of Education, 17, 749-762.
Hojo,R. (2000). A study of learning strategies used by Japanese EFL students (9). Bulletin of Joetsu University of
Education, 20, 177-189.
Kelly,M. (2005). Motivation, the Japanese freshman university student and foreign language acquisition.
JALT Hokkaido Journal, 9, 32-47.
Kimura,Y. (1999). Gaikokugo gakushu ni okeru dokizuke [Foreign language learning motivation]. Naruto
English Studies, 12/13, 1-12.
Kimura,Y., Nakata, Y., & Okumura, T. (2001). Language learning motivation of EFL learners in Japana
cross-sectional analysis of various learning milieus. JALT Journal, 23, 47-68.
Koga,T. (2010). Dynamicity of motivation, anxiety and cooperativeness in a semester course. System, 38, 172184.
Koizumi,R., & Kai,T. (1992). Chugaku 3nenkan no eigo gakushu ni okeru gakushu taido, doki, oyobi
noryoku jikohyotei no henka [Changes in attitudes, motives, and perceived attainments in learning

63

ICR

64

Chika KOJIMA TAKAHASHI

English: A cross-sectional study in seventh through ninth grade]. Bulletin of Fukuoka University of
Education, Part IV, 297-307.
Koizumi,R., & Matsuo, K. (1993). A longitudinal study of attitudes and motivation in learning English
among Japanese seventh-grade students. Japanese Psychological Research, 35, 1-11.
Konishi,M. (1990). Changes in motivation for English language learning; A series of four measurements.
Institute for Research in Language Teaching Bulletin, 4, 1-23.
Matsuoka,R. (2004). Motivation constructs in learning English among Japanese college students. Pan-Pacific
Association of Applied Linguistics, 8, 195-212.
Miyahara,F., Namoto, M., Yamanaka, S., Murakami, R., Kinoshita, M., & Yamamoto, H. (1997). Konomamade
yoika daigaku eigokyoiku [Current status of university English education: Comparison of university
students ability in English and learning behavior in China, Korea, and Japan]. Tokyo: Shohakusya.
Mori,S. (2002b). Redefining motivation to read in a foreign language. Reading in a Foreign Language, 14, 91110.
Mori,S., & Gobel,P. (2006). Motivation and gender in the Japanese EFL classroom. System, 34, 194-208.
Neff,P.E. (2007). The roles of anxiety and motivation in language learner task performance. Doshisha Studies
in Language and Culture, 10, 23-42.
ODonnell,K. (2003). Uncovering first students language learning experiences, attitudes, and motivations
in a context of change at the tertiary level of education. JALT Journal, 25, 31-62.
Sakuragi,T. (2008). Attitudes toward language study and cross-cultural attitudes in Japan. International Journal
of Intercultural Relations, 32, 81-90.
Takada,T. (2003). Learner characteristics of early starters and late starters of English language learning:
Anxiety, motivation, and aptitude. JALT Journal, 25, 5-30.
Takagi,A. (2003). The effects of early childhood language learning experience on motivation towards
learning English: A survey of public junior high school students. JASTEC Journal, 22, 47-71.
Takanashi,Y. (1991). Eigogakushu ni okeru togoteki dokizuke to doguteki dokizuke no yakuwari [Role
of integrative and instrumental orientations in English learning]. Bulletin of Fukuoka University of
Education, Part I, 40, 53-60.
Takanashi,Y. (1992). Eigogakushu ni okeru joiteki yoin no yakuwari [Role of affective factors in English
learning]. Bulletin of Fukuoka University of Education, Part I, 41, 59-68.
Takanashi,Y. (1994). Eigogakushu ni okeru gakushu doki, gakushu horyaku, eigogakuryoku no kankei
[Relationships among learning motivation, learning strategies, and English proficiency in English
learning]. Bulletin of Fukuoka University of Education, Part I, 43, 45-61.
Teweles,B. (1996). Motivational differences between Chinese and Japanese learners of English as a foreign
language. JALT Journal, 18, 211-228.
Tsuchihira,T. (1993). Motivation and personalities in introducing communicative English teaching in the
Japanese context. Tsukuba Eigo Kyoiku, 14, 233-250.
Usuki,M. (2001). From the learners perspectives: The needs for awareness-raising towards autonomy and
roles of the teachers. (ERIC Document Reproduction No ED 455694)
Yamamoto,H. (1993). Identifying how components of motivation as well as attitudes affect Japanese college
students learning of EFL. Bulletin of Seinan Jo Gakuin University, 40, 1-14.
Yashima,T. (2000). Orientations and motivation in foreign language learning: A study of Japanese college
students. JACET Bulletin, 31, 121-133.
Yoshitomi,A. (1990). Attitudes and motivation of Japanese high school students in learning English as a
foreign language. Sophia Linguistica, 28, 111-127.

References
Aloiau,E.K.W. (2001). Enhancing student motivation in an intensive English language program. Retrieved from
ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (AAT 3031494)
Berwick,R., & Ross,S. (1989). Motivation after matriculation: Are Japanese learners of English still alive after
exam hell? JALT Journal, 11, 193-210.

Investigating the Socio-Educational Model of Foreign Language Motivation in Japan

Drnyei,Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Drnyei,Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Drnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language
identity and the L2 self (pp.9-42). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Drnyei,Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Teaching and researching motivation (2nd ed.). Harlow, England: Longman.
Gardner,R.C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London:
Edward Arnold.
Gardner,R.C. (2001). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition. In Z. Drnyei & R. Schmidt
(Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp.1-19). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii,
Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Gardner,R.C., Tremblay, P. F., & Masgoret, A. (1997). Towards a full model of second language learning: An
empirical investigation. The Modern Language Journal, 81, 344-362.
Irie,K. (2003). What do we know about the language learning motivation of university students in Japan?
Some patterns in survey studies. JALT Journal, 25, 86-101.
Irie,K. (2005). Stability and flexibility of language learning motivation: A multimethod study of Japanese junior high
school students. Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (AAT 3176834)
Mori,S. (2002a). The relationship between motivation and the amount of out-of-class reading. Retrieved from
ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (AAT 3040345)
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative metaanalysis. Language Learning, 50, 417-528.
Ortega,L. (2010). Research synthesis. In B. Paltridge & A. Phakiti (Eds.), Companion to research methods in
applied linguistics (pp.111-126). London: Continuum.
Pease,E. J. (2006). The role of affect in Japanese adolescents learning English. Retrieved from ProQuest Digital
Dissertations. (AAT 3206883)
Rothstein,H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (Eds.) (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention,
assessment and adjustments. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
Ushioda,E. (2001). Language learning at university: Exploring the role of motivational thinking. In Z.
Drnyei & R. Schmidt. (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp.93-125). Honolulu, HI:
University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Williams,M., & Burden, R. (1999). Students developing conceptions of themselves as language learner.
Modern Language Journal, 83, 193-201.
Yashima,T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The
Modern Language Journal, 86, 54-66.
Yashima, T. (2009). International posture and the ideal L2 self in the Japanese EFL context. In Z. Drnyei
& E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp.144-163). Clevedon, UK:
Multilingual Matters.

65