Advertisement

The development and validation of an attitude towards MALL instrument

  • Talip GonulalEmail author
Development Article

Abstract

In light of increasing interest in mobile-assisted language learning (MALL) and recent calls for more replication studies in second language research, the present study aimed to develop and validate an attitudinal instrument to measure language learners’ attitudes towards MALL. In doing so, the present study partially and conceptually replicated Vandewaetere and Desmet’s (Comput Assist Lang Learn 22(4):349–380, 2009) computer-assisted language learning attitude scale. The attitude towards MALL (A-MALL) instrument, consisting of 20 items, was validated across a sample of 244 participants with diverse educational and demographic backgrounds. Principal components analysis and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to examine the psychometric features of the items, and to determine the underlying factor structure. The results revealed a five-factor solution, which was largely in line with the tripartite model of attitude (i.e., affective, cognitive and behavioral components). Further, the A-MALL instrument exhibited good reliability and validity. Finally, the limitations of the study and the future use of the A-MALL instrument in second language research are discussed.

Keywords

Attitude Mobile-assisted language learning Replication research Scale development 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Albarracin, D., Johnson, B. T., Zanna, M. P., & Kumkale, G. T. (2005). Attitudes: Introduction and scope. In D. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 3–19). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  2. Al-Emran, M., Elsherif, H. M., & Shaalan, K. (2016). Investigating attitudes towards the use of mobile learning in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 93–102.Google Scholar
  3. Aryadoust, V., Mehran, P., & Alizadeh, M. (2016). Validating a computer assisted language learning attitude instrument used in Iranian EFL context: An evidence-based approach. Computer Assisted Language Learning Journal, 29(3), 561–595.Google Scholar
  4. Aryadoust, V., & Shahsavar, Z. (2016). Validity of the Persian blog attitude questionnaire: An evidence-based approach. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 15(1), 417–451.Google Scholar
  5. Ayres, R. (2002). Learner attitudes towards the use of CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning Journal, 15(3), 241–249.Google Scholar
  6. Briz-Ponce, L., Pereira, A., Carvalho, L., Juanes-Méndez, J. A., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2017). Learning with mobile technologies—Students’ behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 612–620.Google Scholar
  7. Burston, J. (2013). Mobile-assisted language learning: A selected annotated bibliography of implementation studies 1994–2012. Language Learning & Technology, 17(3), 157–225.Google Scholar
  8. Burston, J. (2014). MALL: The pedagogical challenges. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(4), 344–357.Google Scholar
  9. Burston, J. (2015). Twenty years of MALL project implementation: A meta-analysis of learning outcomes. ReCALL, 27(1), 4–20.Google Scholar
  10. Chen, X. B. (2013). Tablets for informal language learning: Student usage and attitudes. Language Learning & Technology, 17(1), 20–36.Google Scholar
  11. Chun, D. M. (2012). Replication studies in CALL research. CALICO Journal, 29(4), 591–600.Google Scholar
  12. Csizér, K., & Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The internal structure of language learning motivation and its relationship with language choice and learning effort. The Modern Language Journal, 89(1), 19–36.Google Scholar
  13. Dashtestani, R. (2016). Moving bravely towards mobile learning: Iranian students’ use of mobile devices for learning English as a foreign language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(4), 815–832.Google Scholar
  14. Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language learning: Advances in theory, research, and applications. Language Learning, 53(S1), 3–32.Google Scholar
  15. Dörnyei, Z. (2014). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Dörnyei, Z., & Taguchi, T. (2009). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Duman, G., Orhon, G., & Gedik, N. (2015). Research trends in mobile assisted language learning from 2000 to 2012. ReCALL, 27(2), 197–216.Google Scholar
  18. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  19. Gonulal, T. (2019). Missing data management practices in L2 research: The good, the bad and the ugly. Erzincan University Education Faculty Journal, 21(1), 1–18.Google Scholar
  20. Gonulal, T. (forthcoming). The use of Instagram as a mobile-assisted language learning tool. Contemporary Educational Technology.Google Scholar
  21. Hair, J., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  22. Hogg, M. A., & Vaughan, G. M. (2011). Social psychology (6th ed.). Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
  23. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.Google Scholar
  24. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.Google Scholar
  25. Jahromi, S. A., & Salimi, F. (2013). Exploring the human element of computer-assisted language learning: An Iranian context. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(2), 158–176.Google Scholar
  26. Jones, T., & Clarke, V. A. (1994). A computer attitude scale for secondary students. Computers in Education, 22(4), 315–318.Google Scholar
  27. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  28. Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2009). Will mobile learning change language learning? ReCALL, 21(2), 157–165.Google Scholar
  29. Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2012). Mobile-assisted language learning. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 3701–3709). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  30. Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Shield, L. (2008). An overview of mobile assisted language learning: From content delivery to supported collaboration and interaction. ReCALL, 20(3), 271–289.Google Scholar
  31. Liaw, S. S., Huang, H. M., & Chen, G. D. (2007). Surveying instructor and learner attitudes toward e-learning. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1066–1080.Google Scholar
  32. Lindstromberg, S., & Eyckmans, J. (2017). The particular need for replication in the quantitative study of SLA: A case study of the mnemonic effect of assonance in collocations. Journal of the European Second Language Association, 1(1), 126–136.Google Scholar
  33. Loewen, S., & Gonulal, T. (2015). Exploratory factor analysis and principal components analysis. In L. Plonsky (Ed.), Advancing quantitative methods in second language research. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Mantle-Bromley, C. (1995). Positive attitudes and realistic beliefs: Links to proficiency. The Modern Language Journal, 79(3), 371–386.Google Scholar
  35. Mantle-Bromley, C., & Miller, R. B. (1991). Effect of multicultural lessons on attitudes of students of Spanish. The Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 418–425.Google Scholar
  36. Marsden, E., Morgan-Short, K., Thompson, S., & Abugaber, D. (2018). Replication in second language research: Narrative and systematic reviews and recommendations for the field. Language Learning, 68(2), 321–391.Google Scholar
  37. O’brien, R. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity, 41(5), 673–690.Google Scholar
  38. Plonsky, L. (2015). Quantitative considerations for improving replicability in CALL and applied linguistics. CALICO Journal, 32(2), 232–244.Google Scholar
  39. Plonsky, L., & Gonulal, T. (2015). Methodological synthesis in quantitative L2 research: A review of reviews and a case study of exploratory factor analysis. Language Learning, 65(S1), 9–36.Google Scholar
  40. Porte, G. (2012). Replication research in applied linguistics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Porte, G. (2013). Who needs replication? CALICO Journal, 30(1), 10–15.Google Scholar
  42. Porte, G., & Richards, K. (2012). Replication in quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 284–293.Google Scholar
  43. Reinders, H. & Hubbard, P. (2013). CALL and learner autonomy: Affordances and constraints. In M. Thomas, H. Reinders, & M. Warschauer (Eds.), Contemporary computer assisted language learning (pp. 359–375). London: Continuum Books.Google Scholar
  44. Reinders, H., & Pegrum, M. (2015). Supporting language learning on the move: An evaluative framework for mobile language learning resources. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Second language acquisition research and materials development for language learning (pp. 116–141). London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  45. Reinders, H., & White, C. (2010). The theory and practice of technology in materials development and task design. In N. Harwood (Ed.), Materials in ELT: Theory and practice (pp. 58–80). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7(2), 147–177.Google Scholar
  47. Shaft, T. M., Sharfman, M. P., & Wu, W. W. (2004). Reliability assessment of the attitude towards computers instrument (ATCI). Computers in Human Behaviour, 20(5), 661–689.Google Scholar
  48. Smith, B., & Schulze, M. (2013). Thirty years of the CALICO Journal—Replicate, replicate, replicate. CALICO Journal, 30(1), i–iv.Google Scholar
  49. Stockwell, G. (2008). Investigating learner preparedness for and usage patterns of mobile learning. ReCALL, 20(3), 253–270.Google Scholar
  50. Stockwell, G., & Hubbard, P. (2013). Some emerging principles for mobile-assisted language learning. Monterey, CA: The International Research Foundation for English Language Education. Retrieved from http://www.tirfonline.org/english-in-the-workforce/mobile-assisted-language-learning.
  51. Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., & Yang, J. M. (2015). How effective are mobile devices for language learning? A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 16, 68–84.Google Scholar
  52. Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson Education Inc.Google Scholar
  53. Teo, T. (2006). Attitudes towards computers: A study of post-secondary students in Singapore. Interactive Learning Environments, 14(1), 17–24.Google Scholar
  54. Ushida, E. (2005). The role of students’ attitudes and motivation in second language learning in online courses. CALICO Journal, 23(1), 49–78.Google Scholar
  55. Vandewaetere, M., & Desmet, P. (2009). Introducing psychometrical validation of questionnaires in CALL research: The case of measuring attitude towards CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(4), 349–380.Google Scholar
  56. Viberg, O., & Grönlund, Å. (2013). Cross-cultural analysis of users’ attitudes towards the use of mobile devices in second and foreign language learning in higher education: A case from Sweden and China. Computers & Education, 69, 169–180.Google Scholar
  57. Wiebe, G., & Kabata, K. (2010). Students’ and instructors’ attitudes towards the use of CALL in foreign language teaching and learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(3), 221–234.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of English Language Education, Department of Foreign Languages Teaching, Faculty of EducationErzincan Binali Yildirim UniversityErzincanTurkey

Personalised recommendations