Study on Correlation of English Pronunciation Self-Concept to English Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
English pronunciation self-concept is formed in the process of pronunciation learning, which refers to the learners’ self-conception and assessment of one’s English pronunciation proficiency and pronunciation (Gimson, A. C. 1980). This paper reports an investigation on 237 non-English major college students into the relationship between English pronunciation self-concept and English performance, global English self-concept, English classroom anxieties; the relationship between global English self-concept and the sub-dimension of it. It was found that a moderate but statistically significant correlation obtained. Furthermore, English pronunciation self-concept correlated significantly to the global English self-concept and the latter exhibited a relatively high correlation to the English performance which is presented by test scores. These results suggest that language learners’ pronunciation self-concept is one of the most important factors which facilitate or hinder foreign language learning. Meanwhile, it has a negative correlation to English class anxiety (Arnold, J., 1999). Therefore, conclusion can be drawn that constructive suggestions are supposed to be put forward and endeavor should be made to improve one’s English pronunciation self-concept to facilitate the English acquisition.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".