Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Splitting the L2 Self-Guide : Ways Forward for Motivation Research

Henry, Alastair LU and Liu, Meng (2025) In Language Teaching Research Quarterly 48. p.30-49
Abstract

Drawing on Markus and Nurius’s (1986) theory of possible selves and Higgins’s (1987) theory of self-discrepancies, Dörnyei (2005, 2009) developed the L2 self-guide, a construct explaining the generation of motivation for language learning. Because Dörnyei focused on convergences in the source theories, L2MSS researchers have come to regard possible selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986) and self-guides (Higgins, 1987) as differing manifestations of a common underlying phenomenon. However, when constructs are similar, but not identical, assumptions of equivalence can lead to theoretical and methodological confusion (Lawson & Robins, 2021). Drawing on observations by MacIntyre (2022; MacIntyre et al., 2009a, 2009b) in critical engagements... (More)

Drawing on Markus and Nurius’s (1986) theory of possible selves and Higgins’s (1987) theory of self-discrepancies, Dörnyei (2005, 2009) developed the L2 self-guide, a construct explaining the generation of motivation for language learning. Because Dörnyei focused on convergences in the source theories, L2MSS researchers have come to regard possible selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986) and self-guides (Higgins, 1987) as differing manifestations of a common underlying phenomenon. However, when constructs are similar, but not identical, assumptions of equivalence can lead to theoretical and methodological confusion (Lawson & Robins, 2021). Drawing on observations by MacIntyre (2022; MacIntyre et al., 2009a, 2009b) in critical engagements with Dörnyei’s scholarship, this article addresses disparities in the source construct conceptualizations. It considers the implications that follow when sibling constructs are viewed as identical, and when possible selves and self-guides are conjoined in a unitary construct. Together, conceptual divergencies in the source constructs and concerns about the validity of L2MSS scales (Al-Hoorie, et al., 2024a, 2024b) mean that the L2 self-guide should be disassembled. Ultimately, it is only if possible selves and self-guides are understood and investigated as discrete constructs that the value they may have for L2 motivation research can be fully assessed.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
and
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
L2 Motivation, L2 Motivational Self System, Possible Selves, Self-Guides, Sibling Constructs, Standards
in
Language Teaching Research Quarterly
volume
48
pages
20 pages
publisher
European Knowledge Development (EUROKD)
external identifiers
  • scopus:105010613845
DOI
10.32038/ltrq.2025.48.03
language
English
LU publication?
yes
additional info
Publisher Copyright: © 2025, European Knowledge Development (EUROKD). All rights reserved.
id
3388e434-6642-49d5-ab94-c990e9a601ee
date added to LUP
2026-01-26 15:39:44
date last changed
2026-01-26 15:40:22
@article{3388e434-6642-49d5-ab94-c990e9a601ee,
  abstract     = {{<p>Drawing on Markus and Nurius’s (1986) theory of possible selves and Higgins’s (1987) theory of self-discrepancies, Dörnyei (2005, 2009) developed the L2 self-guide, a construct explaining the generation of motivation for language learning. Because Dörnyei focused on convergences in the source theories, L2MSS researchers have come to regard possible selves (Markus &amp; Nurius, 1986) and self-guides (Higgins, 1987) as differing manifestations of a common underlying phenomenon. However, when constructs are similar, but not identical, assumptions of equivalence can lead to theoretical and methodological confusion (Lawson &amp; Robins, 2021). Drawing on observations by MacIntyre (2022; MacIntyre et al., 2009a, 2009b) in critical engagements with Dörnyei’s scholarship, this article addresses disparities in the source construct conceptualizations. It considers the implications that follow when sibling constructs are viewed as identical, and when possible selves and self-guides are conjoined in a unitary construct. Together, conceptual divergencies in the source constructs and concerns about the validity of L2MSS scales (Al-Hoorie, et al., 2024a, 2024b) mean that the L2 self-guide should be disassembled. Ultimately, it is only if possible selves and self-guides are understood and investigated as discrete constructs that the value they may have for L2 motivation research can be fully assessed.</p>}},
  author       = {{Henry, Alastair and Liu, Meng}},
  keywords     = {{L2 Motivation; L2 Motivational Self System; Possible Selves; Self-Guides; Sibling Constructs; Standards}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  pages        = {{30--49}},
  publisher    = {{European Knowledge Development (EUROKD)}},
  series       = {{Language Teaching Research Quarterly}},
  title        = {{Splitting the L2 Self-Guide : Ways Forward for Motivation Research}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2025.48.03}},
  doi          = {{10.32038/ltrq.2025.48.03}},
  volume       = {{48}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}