Post 85: The Affective Filter Hypothesis

Post 86: The Affective Filter Hypothesis

I remember my professor at UCLA stated that the Affective Filter is similar to the Monitor Hypothesis where adults who have to overcome habitual roadblocks from their first language in order to learn a second language. While the Monitor Hypothesis focuses on not having the adult translate from his first language into the second language, the Affective Filter focuses on an adult's anxiety, or lack of emotional motivation to learn a second language. The Affective Filter states the psychological roadblocks an adult has to overcome because the adult is always afraid he/she does not speak the target language like the native speaker so a second language learner may be reluctant to speak the target language in front of native speakers. 

Krashen states this self consciousness occurs at puberty when children want to be like others."This concept receives the briefest treatment in “The Natural Approach”.  Krashen simply states that “attitudinal variables relate directly to language acquisition but not language learning.”  He cites several studies that examine the link between motivation and self-image, arguing that an “integrative” motivation (the learner want to “be like” the native speakers of a language) is necessary.  He postulates an “affective filter” that acts before the Language Acquisition Device and restricts the desire to seek input if the learner does not have such motivation.  Krashen also says that at puberty, this filter increases dramatically in strength." (Romeo, Ken, Krashen and Terrell "The Natural Approach)

Freeman states, "How do affective factors such as nervousness, boredom or anxiety influence language acquisition? If language is acquired when a person receives comprehensible input, the input has to reach the part of the brain that processes language. Boredom and anxiety can act as  a kind of filter to block out incoming messages and prevent them from triggering acquisition." (Freeman, 69)

Therefore, if a student is anxious, self conscious or nervous, he/she may not acquire language and comprehensible input given by the teacher may not trigger LAD and the student will not acquire the target language. Therefore, students need to be relaxed and in a stress free environment to learn language properly. Teachers need to make language learning fun, easy so that students become highly motivated to learn a language. This is why students acquire language by listening to music in the target language, watching movies in the target language, having native speaker pen pals, cooking in the target language, Students love classes where there is more social interaction.

Krashen's theories helped reshape how teachers taught a foreign language. Instead of using the Grammar Translation method/ Audio Lingual method of FLT, Krashen's influence on FLT is to make FLT and SLA more natural akin to how children learn their first language. Krashen wants to do away with rote memorization of grammar rules, vocabulary, phonics, memorization of sight words, repetitive oral drills, and make FLT fun again the way young children learn language from their parents without schooling. 

However, many educators disagree with Krashen's theories and provide evidence that learning grammar rules, phonics, rote memorization and oral drills should also be classified as comprehensible input. At my university, those who disagreed with Krashen called themselves, Krashen Bashing. At the time I was at UCLA, Krashen was teaching at USC so there is a natural cross town rivalry between our two universities. Anyway, I will discuss further in future posts about educators who disagree with Krashen's SLA theories. But first, I will go over a few more SLA theories that grew out of Krashen's five SLA theories.

Romeo, Ken, Krashen and Terrell, "The Natural Approach".

Freeman, David & Freeman, Yvonne. (2014) Essential Linguistics. Heinnemann