Despite extensive research on communication strategies used by EFL learners during oral production, relatively little is known about the specific aspects that students prioritize while speaking and how these prioritizations are associated with learner-related factors. Existing scholarship remains limited and predominantly performance-based, with insufficient attention to learners’ own voices. The present study thus fills these voids by examining 244 Vietnamese EFL undergraduates’ speaking prioritizations (i.e., self-reported focus on linguistic, non-linguistic, and interactive communication aspects during speaking) and their associations with perceived confidence and prior experience (i.e., speaking practice frequency and prior school backgrounds). Drawing on models of attentional resources in second language speaking (Robinson, 2003; Skehan, 1998), this study collected data through a questionnaire-based mixed quantitative-qualitative design, with rating-scale items and one open-ended question. The quantitative results showed that participants reported prioritizing linguistic, non-linguistic, and interactive communication aspects at varying degrees, with interactive communication rated higher than linguistic aspects. Moreover, weak-to-moderate correlations were observed between speaking prioritizations and perceived confidence as well as prior experience. Students of differing levels of perceived confidence and prior experience also reported different linguistic, non-linguistic and interactive prioritizations in speaking. The qualitative findings further identified learner-related factors that contribute to students’ self-reported speaking confidence and focus of attention. The current study offers potential pedagogical implications that inform learner-responsive speaking instruction and contribute to a more nuanced understanding of oral communication development in EFL contexts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nguyen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: