ejcrEurasian Journal of Current Research in Psychology and PedagogyEurasian Journal of Current Research in Psychology and Pedagogy2959-39992959-4006Университет «Туран»10.46914/2959-3999-2026-1-1-36-42ejcr-288Research ArticleПрикладная психология и исследованияApplied Psychology and ResearchИндивидуальные различия в изучении языка: темперамент, когнитивные стили и персонализация обученияIndividual differences in language learning: temperament, cognitive styles and personalization of instructionhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-8555-9994БеркинбаеваГ. О.BerkinbayevaG. O.

PhD, ст. преподаватель

Алматы

PhD, senior lecturer

Almaty

g.berkinbayevaa@gmail.comКазахский национальный женский педагогический университетКазахстанKazakh National Women’s Teacher Training UniversityKazakhstan202613022026013642Copyright © Беркинбаева Г.О., 20262026Беркинбаева Г.О.Berkinbayeva G.O.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://ejcrpp.turan-edu.kz/jour/article/view/288

Данное эмпирическое исследование изучает взаимосвязь между индивидуальными психологическими различиями и результатами изучения английского языка среди студентов университета. В исследовании приняли участие 80 студентов (средний возраст = 19,8 лет, SD = 1,2) крупного городского университета. В исследовании использовались стандартизированные инструменты, включая опросник личности Айзенка (EPQ) для оценки темперамента, анализ когнитивного стиля Райдинга для измерения когнитивных стилей (параметры вербально-образный и холистически-аналитический) и Кембриджский тест по определению уровня владения английским языком для оценки языковой компетенции. Результаты показывают значимые корреляции между экстраверсией и успеваемостью в говорении (r = 0,42, p < 0,01), между образным когнитивным стилем и усвоением лексики (r = 0,38, p < 0,01), а также между аналитическим стилем и пониманием грамматики (r = 0,44, p < 0,01). Множественный регрессионный анализ выявил, что параметры когнитивного стиля предсказывали 31% дисперсии общего уровня владения английским языком (R² = 0,31, p < 0,001). На основании полученных данных мы предлагаем концепцию персонализированного языкового обучения, учитывающую темперамент учащихся и их когнитивные предпочтения. Исследование демонстрирует, что индивидуальные различия существенно влияют на процессы и результаты изучения языка, что указывает на необходимость дифференцированных педагогических подходов в контексте английского языка как иностранного.

This empirical study examines the relationship between individual psychological differences and English language learning outcomes among university students. A sample of 80 students (mean age = 19.8 years, SD = 1.2) from a large urban university participated in this research. The study utilized standardized instruments including the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) to assess temperament, the Riding Cognitive Style Analysis to measure cognitive styles (verbal-imagery and wholist-analytic dimensions), and Cambridge English Placement Test to evaluate language proficiency. Results indicate significant correlations between extraversion and speaking performance (r = 0.42, p < 0.01), between imagery cognitive style and vocabulary acquisition (r = 0.38, p < 0.01), and between analytic style and grammar comprehension (r = 0.44, p < 0.01). Multiple regression analysis revealed that cognitive style dimensions predicted 31% of variance in overall English proficiency (R² = 0.31, p < 0.001). Based on these findings, we propose a framework for personalized language instruction that considers learner temperament and cognitive preferences. The study demonstrates that individual differences significantly impact language learning processes and outcomes, suggesting the need for differentiated pedagogical approaches in EFL contexts.

индивидуальные различиятемпераменткогнитивные стилиизучение английского языкаперсонализированное обучениестуденты университетаindividual differencestemperamentcognitive stylesEnglish language learningpersonalized instructionuniversity studentsReferencesDörnyei Z. Individual differences in second language // Language Learning. 2015. Vol. 65. Suppl. 1. P. 1–4.Dörnyei Z. Individual differences in second language // Language Learning. 2015. Vol. 65. Suppl. 1. P. 1–4.Robinson P. Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes and learning conditions in second language acquisition // Second Language Research. 2001. Vol. 17. No. 4. P. 368–392.Robinson P. Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes and learning conditions in second language acquisition // Second Language Research. 2001. Vol. 17. No. 4. P. 368–392.Ellis R. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.1142 p.Ellis R. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.1142 p.Rothbart M.K. Temperament and personality: Origins and outcomes // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2006. Vol. 91. No. 1. P. 122–135.Rothbart M.K. Temperament and personality: Origins and outcomes // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2006. Vol. 91. No. 1. P. 122–135.Dewaele J.-M. The effect of perception of teacher characteristics on Spanish language anxiety and second language achievement // The Modern Language Journal. 2014. Vol. 98. No. 2. P. 412–432.Dewaele J.-M. The effect of perception of teacher characteristics on Spanish language anxiety and second language achievement // The Modern Language Journal. 2014. Vol. 98. No. 2. P. 412–432.Ehrman M.E. Understanding Second Language Learning Difficulties Oxford. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2003. 320 p.Ehrman M.E. Understanding Second Language Learning Difficulties Oxford. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2003. 320 p.Riding R. Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies: Understanding Style Differences in Learning and Behaviour. London: David Fulton Publishers, 1998. 240 p.Riding R. Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies: Understanding Style Differences in Learning and Behaviour. London: David Fulton Publishers, 1998. 240 p.Kozhevnikov M. Cognitive styles in the context of modern psychology: Toward an integrated framework of cognitive style // Psychological Bulletin. 2007. Vol. 133. No. 3. P. 464–481.Kozhevnikov M. Cognitive styles in the context of modern psychology: Toward an integrated framework of cognitive style // Psychological Bulletin. 2007. Vol. 133. No. 3. P. 464–481.Andreou G. Learning styles and performance in second language tasks. TESOL Quarterly. 2005. Vol. 39. No. 3. P. 517–528.Andreou G. Learning styles and performance in second language tasks. TESOL Quarterly. 2005. Vol. 39. No. 3. P. 517–528.Pashler H. Learning styles: Concepts and evidence // Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2008. Vol. 9. No. 3. P. 105–119.Pashler H. Learning styles: Concepts and evidence // Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2008. Vol. 9. No. 3. P. 105–119.Oxford R.L. Teaching and Researching Language Learning Strategies: Self-regulation in Context. New York: Routledge, 2017. 550 p.Oxford R.L. Teaching and Researching Language Learning Strategies: Self-regulation in Context. New York: Routledge, 2017. 550 p.Csizér K. The Internal Structure of Language Learning Motivation and Its Relationship with Language Choice and Learning Effort // The Modern Language Journal. 2005. Vol. 89. No. 1. P. 19–36.Csizér K. The Internal Structure of Language Learning Motivation and Its Relationship with Language Choice and Learning Effort // The Modern Language Journal. 2005. Vol. 89. No. 1. P. 19–36.Winke P. The effects of individual differences on learners’ performance in a software-based, selfdirected language learning environment // Language Learning & Technology. 2013. Vol. 17. No. 2. P. 36–52.Winke P. The effects of individual differences on learners’ performance in a software-based, selfdirected language learning environment // Language Learning & Technology. 2013. Vol. 17. No. 2. P. 36–52.Lamb M. Learner and teacher motivation in English language teaching // ELT Journal. 2017. Vol. 71. No. 2. P. 222–227.Lamb M. Learner and teacher motivation in English language teaching // ELT Journal. 2017. Vol. 71. No. 2. P. 222–227.Eysenck S.B.G. Manual of the Eysenck Personality Scales (EPS Adult). London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1985. 48 p.Eysenck S.B.G. Manual of the Eysenck Personality Scales (EPS Adult). London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1985. 48 p.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.