DIFFERENCES OF COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES USED BY EXTROVERT STUDENTS AND INTROVERT STUDENTS IN ENGLISH SPEAKING ACTIVITY AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMAN 10 BANDAR LAMPUNG

ABSTRACT

DIFFERENCES OF COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES USED BY EXTROVERT STUDENTS AND INTROVERT STUDENTS IN ENGLISH SPEAKING ACTIVITY AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMAN 10 BANDAR LAMPUNG

By Elsya Rivana

There are some factors that influence the choice of CSs, such as learner’s attitude, language proficiency, and personality. In term of the students’ personality factor, Extrovert and introvert students are the most common types of students in class. This research relates communication strategies to the personality of the learners. It is aimed to find out which communication strategy frequently used by extrovert

students and introvert students. The subject of this research is students of the second grade of SMAN 10 Bandar Lampung; second grade of science which consists of 36 students is taken as a sample.

A set of questionnaire was used to classify the students into extrovert and introvert. It also used a conversation to elicit the data of CSs used by both of group. Then, the researcher used taxonomic of CSs proposed by Dorney to analyze the type of CSs used by both of group.

The result shows that there are 138 CSs used by extrovert and introvert students. Extroverts use 52 CSs and they tend to use appeal for help more often. Meanwhile, introverts use 86 CSs and they frequently use time gaining strategy which is using fillers in the conversation.

It can be concluded that the introvert students use more communication strategies than extrovert students. Their preference in using CSs is also different. Extrovert students tend to use appeal for help frequently. Meanwhile, introvert students mostly use time gaining strategy. Both types use different communication strategies to overcome their communication problems that may appear in speaking activity.

Research Title : DIFFERENCES OF COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES USED BY EXTROVERT STUDENTS AND INTROVERT STUDENTS IN ENGLISH SPEAKING ACTIVITY AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMAN 10 BANDAR LAMPUNG Student’s Name : Elsya Rivana

Student’s Number : 0913042007

Department : Language and Arts Education Study Program : English Education

Faculty : Teacher Training and Education Faculty

APPROVED BY Advisory Committee

Advisor Co-Advisor

Drs. Hery Yufrizal, M.A., Ph.D. Dra. Rosita Simbolon, M.A. NIP 19600719 198511 1 001 NIP 19480920 197503 2 001

The Chairpersons of

The Department of language and arts Education

Dr. Muhammad Fuad, M.Hum. NIP 19590722198603 1 003

1. Examination Committee

Chairperson : Drs. Hery Yufrizal, M.A., Ph.D. ………

Examiner : Dr. Muhammad Sukirlan, M.A. ………

Secretary : Dra. Rosita Simbolon, M.A. ………

2. The Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty

Dr. H. Bujang Rahman, M.Si. NIP 19600315 198303 1 003

CURRICULUM VITAE

The writer’s name is Elsya Rivana. She was born in Candimas on February 12th, 1991. She is the first daughter of a remarkable couple, Solihat and Enung Rohayati. She has a little sister, name Elma Nur Mela.

In 1997, she studied in SDN 4 Candimas, Natar, South Lampung. Then, she pursued her school to SMPN 1 Natar and graduated in 2006. After graduating from junior high school, she joined to SMAN 1 Natar and graduated in 2009. During her study in senior high school, she was active in joining some competitions, such as Battle of Brain, and Olympic of Economic for Social Students.

In 2009, she was accepted in Lampung University as a student of English Department at Teacher Training and Education Faculty through PKAB program. During her study, she actively joined UKM-U ESo and was promoted as Deputy of Homebase and Administration Department in 2010, and Head of Homebase Department of the organization in 2011. Through this organization, she followed local, national and international English competition, such as South East Asia English Olympic, Java Overland Various English Debate, Bawor Cup, Idea Debate, and EEC in Action. In addition, she became Head Officer of Lampung Overland Various English

Completion held by UKM-U Eso, and Deputy of Event Organizer of English Festival held by this organization. She completed her KKN in Kedondong, Pesawaran, from July to August 2012 and teaching practice program (PPL) at SMPN 3 Kedondong, Pesawaran, from July to September 2012.

While studying in Lampung University, she also had teaching experience as an English teacher at Siklus in 2010-2011, and Ambassador English Course from November-December 2012.

MOTTO

“The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their

dreams”

DEDICATION

This script is proudly dedicated to:

My beloved outstanding parents, Solihat and Enung Rohayati

My lovable excellent sister, Elma Nur Mela

My close friends in English Department ‘09, and English Society

Dede Jihan, Intan Hamzah, Rizki Bunga, Tyas Hantia, Ayu Pratami, Tyas Desita, Triya Heny, Rachma Patria, Annisa Octa, Ketrin Viollita, Irene Brainnita, Meutia Rachmatia, Eva

Rachmania, and Pratiwi Sundora

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT ... i

APPROVAL ... ii

ADMITTED ... iii

CURRICULUM VITAE ... iv

DEDICATION ... vi

MOTTO ... vii

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ... viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... x

LIST OF TABLES ... xii

LIST OF GRAPHS ... xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES ... xiv

I. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background of the Problem ... 1

1.2. Identification of the Problems ... 4

1.3. Limitation of the problem ... 5

1.4. Formulation of the problems ... 5

1.5. Objectives of the Research ... 5

1.6. Uses of the Research ... 5

1.7. Scope of the Research ... 6

1.8. Definition of Terms ... 7

II. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. Review of Related Research ... 8

2.2. Review of Related Literature ... 10

2.2.1. Psychological Factor in Language Learning ... 10

2.2.2. Theory of Personality ... 16

2.2.3. Characteristic of extrovert and introvert ... 17

2.2.4. Communicative Competence ... 21

2.2.5. Communication Strategy ... 24

2.2.6. Typology of Communication Strategy ... 27

2.2.7. Factors Affecting Choice of CSs ... 38

2.3. Theoretical Assumption ... 39

III. RESEARCH METHODS 3.1. Research Design ... 41

3.2. Population and Sample ... 42

3.3. Data Collecting Technique ... 42

3.3.1 Questionnaire ... 42

3.3.3 Recording ... 44

3.3.4 Transcribing ... 45

3.3.5 Coding ... 45

3.3.6 Analyzing ... 46

3.4. Validity and Reliability of the Questionnaire ... 46

3.4.1. Validity of the Questionnaire ... 46

3.4.2. Reliability of the Questionnaire ... 47

3.5. Research Procedure ... 48

3.5.1. Determining the Subject ... 48

3.5.2. Distributing the Questionnaire ... 48

3.5.3. Selecting the Test ... 48

3.5.4. Recording ... 49

3.5.5. Transcribing, Coding, and Analyzing ... 50

3.5.6. Concluding the Data ... 50

3.6. Data Analysis ... 50

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1. Result of Data Analysis ... 52

4.1.1 Result of the Questionnaire ... 52

4.1.2 Result of the Conversation Test ... 54

4.1.2.1 Communication Strategies Result in Extrovert Group 54 4.1.2.2 Communication Strategies Result in Introvert Group 56 4.1.3 Qualitative Data of Communication Strategy ... 59

4.1.3.1 Qualitative Data of CSs Used by Extrovert Students . 60 4.1.3.2 Qualitative Data of CSs Used by Introvert Students .. 64

4.2. Discussion ... 69

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1. Conclusions ... 75

5.2. Suggestions ... 76

5.2.1 Suggestions for the Teacher ... 76

5.2.2 Suggestions for Further Research ... 76 REFERENCES

I. INTRODUCTION

This chapter illustrates the reason for conducting the research. It also includes formulation of problem, objectives of the research, uses of the research, scopes of the research, and definition of term; clarified as the followings.

1.1 Background of the Problem

The main purpose of learning foreign language is to use it in communication both in oral or written form. However, different students may have different achievement especially in speaking. They also may have different problems while they are speaking. It may be caused by some different factors, such as teacher’s strategy in teaching language, students’ learning strategy, different needs, preference, and so on. Some researchers have dealt with the assumption that different factors in language learning tend to produce different outcomes of language achievement. Yufrizal (2008) notes some factors in second language learning namely motivation and attitudes, anxiety, age differences, and personality factors. Those factors may influence the success or failure in second language learning. Furthermore, he stated that personality factors consist of extroversion and introversion, risk taking, and field independence. However, among these factors, this study focused on extrovert and introvert.

Jung (1971) says that extrovert is type of people whose attention is directed outside him self. Whereas introvert type belongs to people whose attention are focused on themselves that is toward his ego. Yufrizal (2008) argues that the stereotype of an introvert is someone who is much happier with a book than with other people. The stereotype of extrovert is the opposite: someone happier with people than with a book. Jung also emphasized that extroversion tends to be manifested in outgoing, talkative, energetic behavior, whereas introversion is manifested in more reserved, quiet, shy behavior. Therefore, some researchers agree that extroversion has better communication than someone with introvert personality.

Based on practical teaching experience done by the researcher at SMPN 3 Kedondong, it was found that the students who were active in speaking tended to dislike writing. When the teacher asked them to write, they prefer talking to their friends while the writing activity was denied. Conversely, those students who did not like speaking activity very much were more interested in writing activity. Based on these characteristic, it is concluded that the former students are extrovert while the others are introvert.

In order to prove that the extrovert students have better achievement in speaking, Davies (2004: 541) states that out of eight studies that employ oral language test, six of them show that extroverts perform better than introverts. Meanwhile, Dewaele and Furnham (1999) analyze 30 researchers’ study and the result shows that extroverts have been found to be generally more fluent than introverts in both the L1 and L2.

They are more accurate in their L2, which reinforced the view that fluency and accuracy are separate dimensions in second language proficiency.

Communication seems to be an interesting topic to discuss. Sometime, we face some problems in communication. In addition, most of students in senior high school still have difficulties to use English for communication although they have studied English for three years in junior high school. Thus, they need communication strategy to overcome these problems. Therefore, this study has been developed in order to get deeper information about communication strategy.

According to Bialystok (1990) the familiar ease and fluency with which we sail from one idea to the next in our first language is constantly shattered by some gap in our knowledge of a second language. The forms of these gaps can be a word, a structure, a phrase, a tense marker or an idiom. The attempts to overcome these gaps are described as communication strategies. Wenden and Rubin (1987) state that learners who emphasize the importance of using the language often utilize communication strategies. Besides, O’Malley and Chamot (1990) assert that communication strategies are particularly important “in negotiating meaning where either linguistic structures or sociolinguistic rules are not shared between a second language learner and a speaker of the target language”. For this reason, a communication strategy has given greatly contribution to the foreign language learning.

Moreover, Tarone (1977) stated that personality has a very close relation with the choice of communication strategies. Dealing with the extrovert and introvert

personality in which they have different characteristic in some aspects, it may be assumed that they have different choice of CSs while they are speaking. It also assumed that different characteristic of them can influence the number of using CSs.

Those assumptions make the researcher interested in finding the result about which CSs are frequently used by extrovert and introvert students. Thus, the researcher entitles the script “Differences of Communication Strategies Used by Extrovert Students and Introvert Students in English Speaking Activity at the Second Grade of SMAN 10 Bandar Lampung”.

1.2 Identification of the Problems

The researcher assumed that students have some difficulties in communication while they are talking in English. Moreover, English is not first language for them so they do not use it every time. It is little bit difficult for them to speak as well as native speakers. Thus, the researcher tried to identify several problems of communication as follow:

a. Students get difficulties to distinguish the sound of words in English.

b. Students get difficulties to use appropriate words, phrases, or even sentences in English.

c. Students get difficulties to pronounce the words as well as native speakers do. d. Students lack of vocabulary.

e. Students sometimes use the structure of Bahasa Indonesia when they speak in English.

f. Students may face communication problem while they are speaking.

g. There are no findings which show CSs used by extrovert students and introvert students.

Those problems above may appear in communication. It also may create some information gaps of interlocutors. Thus, they may use CSs in order to overcome those problems above.

1.3 Limitation of the Problem

Based on the problems above, the researcher limits the problem about communication strategy that may be used by students. It is due to the fact that the problems may create some information gaps in communication. So, they may overcome this by using any particular communication strategy. Further, it is focused on CSs used by extrovert students and introvert students who have different ability in communication.

1.4 Formulation of the Problems

Based on the background of the problem above, the formulation of the problems is:

1. Which communication strategies are frequently used by extrovert students and introvert students?

1.5 Objective of the Research

The objective of this research is to analyze which communication strategies are frequently used by extrovert students and introvert students.

1.6 Uses of the Research

There are two uses of the research, they are as follows:

1. Theoretically, this research will contribute in term of verifying the previous researches and theories. Moreover, this research can be used as logical consideration for the next research.

2. Practically, the result of this research will give some information about understanding of communication strategies of extrovert students and introvert students. Furthermore, the result probably can be used by the teacher in order to teach appropriate communication strategy for the students.

1.7 Scope of the Research

Students may have some aspect within their personality, such as motivation, anxiety, self-esteem, etc. Some students may be categorized into extrovert and introvert. Besides, there are students who have low anxiety and high anxiety in using the language. However, this study focuses on analyzing extrovert and introvert students.

The research was conducted at SMAN 10 Bandar Lampung consisting of 26 classes. Meanwhile, the researcher chose the students at the second grade; class XI science 1, as the population. The researcher took this school because mostly the teacher tought conversation in speaking class. However, it always becomes a place in which other researchers conducted their research related to speaking activity. It is due to the fact that they are active in following English competition and got many achievements. It means that the students are active in speaking activity. Thus, the researcher assumed that this school is appropriate as a place to conduct the research.

In this research, the students were divided into two groups; extroversion and introversion based on an instrument to measure their personality called Eysenck Personality Inventory. Each group was asked to have a conversation in which they had to make dialog in pair directly based on the situation given. Extrovert student had a partner from extrovert group and introvert students had a partner from introvert group.

1.8 Definition of the Terms

Communication strategy is utilized to compensate for the blank between learners’ native language and the target language. Its main characteristic is “negotiation of an agreement on meaning” (Tarone, 1981).

Personality is a dynamic organization from the psychophysics in individual, which can also determine his adaptation uniquely toward his environment (Allport in Lester, 1995)

Extrovert is the extent to which a person has a deep-seated to receive ego enhancement, self esteem, and a sense of wholeness from other people as opposed to receiving that affirmation within oneself (Brown, 2000).

Introvert is the extent to which a person derives a sense of wholeness and fulfillment apart from reflection of himself/herself from other people (Brown, 2000).

Communicative Competence is not only as an inherent grammatical competence but also as the ability to use grammatical competence (Hymes, 1972).

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter presents the elaboration related to the theory to cover this study. Since the communication has been an interesting topic, this chapter also mentions some previous research and the finding of the results as well. In addition, theory of psychological factors and personality in language learning are presented in this chapter.

2.1 Review of Related Research

Communication strategy is an interesting topic to be investigated. It is due to the fact that people need communication to interact with others. It means that communication is very important for the success of communicating meaning. Moreover, people also need some strategies while they are communicating in order to make their interlocutor understand about what they mean. Therefore, this study has been widely developed by some previous researchers. For example, Bialystok (1990), who comprehensively analyzes communication strategies for second language use; and Dornyei (1995) outlines an explicit classification of communication strategies.

Another research has been conducted by Yenny (2006). The research is about communication strategies employed by Indonesian English learners based on the length of studies. She finds that there are ten types of communication strategies used

by students who have studied English for 6-8 years and there are nine types of communication strategies used by students who have studied English for 9-11 years. So, conclusion can be made for the two different facts. Overall, the writer finds that actually the length time of studies influences the use of communication strategies. So, this different background of exposure to English may result in the use of their choice of the types of communication strategies.

Wei (2011) has investigated Chinese Learners‟ Communication Strategies. The result shows that Chinese students use reduction strategies more often than others. Students with low language proficiency, compared with students with high language proficiency, tend to use reduction strategy more often. However students with low language proficiency have no definite answer on whether the role of reduction strategies improves oral communicative competence, while students with high language proficiency tend to hold a negative attitude. Besides, Chinese students seldom use achievement strategies. However, they tend to approve the positive role in improving oral communicative competence.

Furthermore, she notes some factors affecting Chinese students‟ achievement strategies include: firstly, the degree to which learners understand the significance of achievement strategy in language learning, secondly, the degree to which learners understand the significance of achievement strategy in language communication, thirdly, the attitude towards language learning and lastly, the cultural differences.

Dealing with personality of students which are extrovert and introvert, Herdawan (2012) has conducted a research entitles “A Comparative Study of Student‟s Writing Achievement between Extrovert and Introvert Students‟ Personality at the Second Year of SMAN 7 Bandar Lampung”. The result shows that students with introvert personality have better achievement in writing than extrovert students.

Some previous researches above prove that CSs has been widely developed, while the case of extrovert and introvert personality has been analyzed. However, there is no a study about communication strategy which is related to extrovert and introvert personality. Therefore, the researcher analyzed that case.

2.2 Review of Related Literature

The researcher tries to identify several points related to this research. There are some points that should be explained deeply. These includes psychological factors in language learning, theory of personality, communicative competence, communication strategy, typology of communication strategy, and factors affecting the choice of CSs.

2.2.1 Psychological Factors in Language Learning

In learning language, several factors may influence the students such as learners' age, linguistics aptitude, individual differences and psychological factors. The psychological factors become a big role in affecting the students in language learning. Psychological factor can be divided into two categories that are affective or emotional and cognitive.

Cognitive factors consist of intelligence, language aptitude, and language learning strategies. Meanwhile, Affective refers to emotional side of human being (Hulse, Egeth, Deese, 1981: 4). The affective factors include the self-esteem, attribution theory and self-efficacy, willingness to communicate, inhibition, risk taking, anxiety, empathy and extroversion.

1. Self-Esteem

Brown (2007: 154) explains self-esteem as the most pervasive of human aspect that influences very much the success of people in their life. Meanwhile, according to Wells and Marwell (1976: 56), self-esteem is the positive thinking of people in valuing themselves. The positive thinking may cause positive physical and emotional behavior of people. Furthermore, Rosenbreng (in Wells and Marwell: 1976: 57), defines that self-esteem will help the people to appreciate themselves and enable them to develop their abilities properly. The self-esteem will help them to take a risk when the challenge appears.

2. Attribution Theory and Self-Efficacy

Weiner in Brown (2007) defines that attribution theory refers to people ability in knowing some factors that support their success or failure in learning. From this theory, self-efficacy then appears. People with high self-efficacy will know that their effort of their success. So, in solving learning problems, they will believe on their efforts. When they fail, they will have positive thinking by viewing that the failure is caused by their own effort which is not enough to get their success. This way of thinking will make the learners learn from their experiences and agree to do the

harder effort in the next. Conversely, people with low self-efficacy, they tend to have negative thinking in facing their failure; such as blaming other people as the cause of their failure, or think that they will not become success in the learning because they are weak, stupid etc.

As stated by Wells and Marwell (1976), people always reflect what they think about themselves in their mind. If they believe that they have enough ability to be success in learning, they will get it, but if they do not believe their own ability and construct the idea that they will be failed in the learning, they will also get it.

3. Willingness to Communicate

Language is as a means of communication and learning language is the process of training to use it. Indeed, trying to practice the language in the real communication is very important in the process of language learning. However, learners have different willingness to do it. Some of language learners have big willingness to practice their language, while some of them do not have it.

Willingness to communicate is related to self confidence, esteem and self-efficacy. The more confident the people are, the more the willingness to communication they have. Some people consider creating the willingness to communicate is very difficult. This difficulty is supported very much by the types of personality; they are inhibition, extroversion or introversion.

4. Inhibition

Hjeelle and Ziegler (1981) state that inhibition is people who have a tendency to protect their ego. Probably, it makes the learners unable to mobilize all potencies they have that actually may be support them to get the good result in learning.

People with inhibition personality will worry very much if the risks that come later will endanger their ego. But, it is needed in learning language because it enables the learners to delay the production to get the best production in the next.

5. Risk Taking

Risk taking is the personality of language learners that enable them to be brave in facing all result or risks came out from their language learning process and practice. This risk taking of course need because learning language will involve some trial-and-error process. This personality is commonly created by the people‟s mental braveness and their high motivation to get the greatest result from their learning.

People with this personality will not easily give up when they get bad result from their learning. In this context, the bad results can be the risk of being fool in front of other people when the learners did some mistakes, causing misunderstanding to the people to whom the learners try to practice their second language, etc. While people who have not good risk taking personality tend to limit their learning efforts strictly, easily give up when facing some learning problems, and next makes possibility of being trauma for further learning process.

6. Anxiety

Scovel (1978) defines the anxiety as the subjective feeling that is associated with uneasiness feeling, frustration, worry and apprehension. The anxiety has some levels, and it usually refers to the negative feeling, but actually it has some benefits in the process of second language learning. That is why anxiety can be in form of harmful anxiety and also helpful anxiety.

The harmful anxiety in learning language means that sometimes, people‟s anxiety causes them nervous or act worse in practicing the language. While the helpful anxiety can learn from their experience in order to motivate them to be harder in learning, or prepare everything well before deciding to produce the language.

7. Empathy

Empathy has its own role in learning second language because it has closed relationship with the people‟s social-ability. To be able to use the language in communication, people should have empathy to understand the context and culture in which they communicate, and the condition of other people they speak to. People with good empathy usually become good communicator. They know better how to communicate and what will be communicated.

In learning second language, empathy enables the learners to understand and associate themselves with the characteristics of the second language they learn. This opinion is supported by Witkin and Goodenough (in Brown, 2007), who stated that empathy is one characteristic of good language learners.

8. Extroversion

Wickes (in Keirsey and Bates, 1984) explained that the introvert learners are particularly vulnerable to damage if asked to behave as an extrovert. They sometimes misunderstand and feel to be pressured when facing some changes. The introvert learners usually show the reticence in dealing with others, the tendency to be retired and shy, the slow development of social skills, the tendency to drop their head and put their fingers in their mouth before strangers, the slowness to volunteer in the classroom or society, the hesitation in sharing their ideas and generally they need privacy very much.

The extrovert learners, according to Kiersey and Bates (1984) have the contrast characteristics from the introvert ones. The extrovert learners usually have better ability to make relationship to other people. They tend to be responsive, expressive and enthusiastic. They always feel ready to enter the group activities and accept some ideas from them. They also have big tolerance for some differences they face, can approach new situation quickly, verbalize quickly, and act quickly.

These two types of personality can guide the learners to use the appropriate approach to learn language. It also decides what language field they can acquire better or worse. Those affective factors may influence indirectly the learners‟ style and strategies for having big roles in shaping peoples‟ emotion and feeling.

2.2.2 Theory of Personality

Personality type is constructed based on the work of a Swiss psychiatrist, Carl Jung, who wrote the book Psychological Types in the 1920s. Then, based on his theory of personality type, a personality model named Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is currently being used besides other personality models, e.g. Five Factor Model, Eysenck‟s model of personality, as a measuring instrument in many psychologically related studies.

Moreover, Richards and Schmidt (2002) define personality as “those aspects of an individual‟s behavior, attitude, beliefs, thoughts, actions and feelings which are seen as typical and distinctive of that person and recognized as such by that person and others. Additionally, according to Allport (1937) in Lester (1995) personality is a dynamic organization from the psychophysics in individual, which can also determine one‟s adaptation uniquely toward one‟s environment.

Furthermore, Myers-Briggs and McCaulley (1985) divide the type of personality into Extroversion-Introversion, Sensing-intuition, Thinking-Feeling, and Judging-Perceiving. On the other hand, according to Yufrizal (2008), there are three personality factors; extroversion and introversion, risk taking, and field independence.

There are some variables that may influence the people to create one personality within themselves. Brown (2000)mentions that personality has several features; they are:

1. Self esteem: the way a person sees himself 2. Inhibition: to adapt the language ego

3. Risk-taking: how to „gamble‟ in learning new language 4. Anxiety: associated with uneasiness, frustration, or worry 5. Empathy: relation between language and society

6. Extroversion

Similarly, Ellis (1989) explains several variables in personality i.e. anxiety, risk-taking, tolerance of ambiguity, empathy, self-esteem, and inhibition and extraversion. Thus, it has been proven that extrovert and introvert exist in personality.

2.2.3 Characteristics of Extroversion and Introversion

The idea of extroversion and introversion as type of personality firstly appeared in works of Sigmund Freud. Then Carl Jung (1923) developed these notions. According to Jung, if the energy tends to run outward, then the individual can be characterized as an extrovert. If the energy runs inward, the individual is characterized as an introvert.

Hans Eysenck, a British psychologist, maintains that the behavioral differences between introverts and extroverts are due to brain physiology. Extroverts want social activity and excitement because it increases their level of arousal, in contrast to introverts who stay away from situations deemed social to keep a minimum arousal level. Eysenck based his division on introverts and extroverts on varying degrees of

specific traits, such as excitability, level of activity, liveliness, degree of being social, and impulsiveness.

The typical extrovert is sociable, likes parties, has many friends, needs to have people to talk to, and does not like studying by him-self. He craves excitement, takes chances, often sticks his neck out, acts on the spur of the moment, and is generally an impulsive individual. He always has a ready answer, and generally likes change. The typical introvert, on the other hand, is quiet, retiring sort of person, introspective, fond of books rather than people; he is reserved and distant, except with intimate friends. He tends to plan ahead and distrust the impulse of the moment. He does not like excitement, takes matters of everyday life with proper seriousness, and likes a well ordered mode of life. (Eysenck, 1965).

The characteristics of extrovert and introvert cannot be used to judge which personality is better. In case of social life, extrovert may be considered more desirable. It is due to their open minded characteristic to communicate with many people, while introvert tends to be more silent. In addition, no scholar mention about good or better personality because it is just the way they express themselves.

The Eysenck theory produces four main types of personality, which he said resembled Galen's Four Temperaments:

a) Stable extroverts (sanguine qualities such as - outgoing, talkative, responsive, easygoing, lively, carefree, leadership)

b) Unstable extroverts (choleric qualities such as - touchy, restless, excitable, changeable, impulsive, irresponsible)

c) Stable introverts (phlegmatic qualities such as - calm, even-tempered, reliable, controlled, peaceful, thoughtful, careful, passive)

d) Unstable introverts (melancholic qualities such as - quiet, reserved, pessimistic, sober, rigid, anxious, and moody).

Graph 2.1 Types of Personality

According to Eysenck, there is no pure extroversion or introversion of one‟s personality. The type of personality may change from one pole to another. In order to see personality of people, we can only see the dominant type, whether the type is

extrovert or introvert. Therefore, we can classify the individual into extroversion or introversion.

Moreover, Crow and Crow (1958) state that extrovert people are usually fluent in speaking, free of feeling worry and not easily get ashamed and awkward, love to work with others, and good at adapting with their surroundings. They also put interest in athletic. In the other hand, introvert people are more fluent in writing than speaking, tend to be serious and anxious, like working alone, often find difficulty in behaving, and love to read. Meanwhile, Burruss and Kaenzig(1999) claim that extroverts and introverts need different kinds of instruction. Introverts prefer to work on their own than in groups, they do not like being in the centre of attention and need time and space to complete the tasks.

The characteristic of extrovert and introvert personality can bee seen from their style of work and communication. Hirsh and Kummerow (1994) presented the following statements concerning work and communication styles, which might be said by extroverts and introvert.

Table 2.2 Work Styles

Extroverts Introverts

1. I seek for different methods to solve tasks.

2. I can concentrate on both my work and what is going on around me.

3. I come up with different ideas during discussions.

4. I look for inspiration outside myself. 5. I am bored when my work proceeds

slowly and monotonous.

1. I seek for quiet for concentration. 2. I concentrate more on the work itself

than on the world around.

3. I come up with ideas while I am alone. 4. I engross in my work and I do not pay

attention to other things.

5. I am irritated when I am disturbed and hurried.

Table 2.3 Communication Styles

Extroverts Introverts

1. When I communicate I usually show my energy and enthusiasm.

2. It is easy for me to talk to one person as well as to many people.

3. I prefer speaking to somebody to writing to him.

4. I easily share information about myself with others.

5. I like sharing my experiences with others.

6. I often must restrain myself from speaking to let other people speak.

7. I think loudly when I draw conclusions.

1. When I communicate I usually do not show my energy unless I speak to somebody whom I know well.

2. I prefer to talk to one person.

3. I prefer writing to somebody to speaking.

4. I do not like sharing information about myself with others.

5. I do not like sharing my experience with others.

6. I need to be provoked to speaking. 7. I analyze and consider conclusions before presenting them.

By seeing the differences between extroverts and introverts above, we can predict what activities extraversion students will enjoy, what sort of teaching methods they require and their learning styles are. We also assume that those differences in especially communication influence the strategy they use in its process.

2.2.4 Communicative Competence

Concept of communicative competence is firstly introduced by Dell Hymes. Hymes (1972) has defined communicative competence not only as an inherent grammatical competence but also as the ability to use grammatical competence in a variety of communicative situations. During 1970‟s and 1980‟s, many linguists are interested in developing the concept of communicative competence. Some of them who have important development to this theory are mentioned in the following.

Spitzberg (1988) defines communication competence as "the ability to interact well with others". He explains the term 'well' refers to accuracy, clarity, comprehensibility, coherence, expertise, effectiveness and appropriateness.

Moreover, a useful framework for understanding communication competence was designed by Spitzberg & Cupach (1984) and is known as the component model of competence because it is comprised of three specific dimensions: motivation (an individual‟s approach or avoidance orientation in various social situations), knowledge (plans of action; knowledge of how to act; procedural knowledge), and skill (behaviors actually performed).

Savignon (1972) defines communicative competence as the ability to function in a truly communicative setting – that is, in a dynamic exchange in which linguistic competence must adapt itself to the total informational input, both linguistic and paralinguistic, of one or more interlocutors.

Canale and Swain (1980) and Canale (1983) describe communicative competence as a synthesis of an underlying system of knowledge and skill needed for communication. In their concept of communicative competence, knowledge refers to the (conscious or unconscious) knowledge of an individual about language and about other aspects of language use.

According to Savignon (1972), the nature of communicative competence is not static but dynamic; it is more interpersonal than intrapersonal and relative rather than absolute. It may assume that internal factor of people may cause communicative

competence rather than caused external factor. In the other words, someone with good internal factor (e.g. motivation) may have good communicative competence.

Applied linguists, Canale and Swain (1980) have published an influential article in which they argued that the ability to communicate required four different sub-competencies:

1. Grammatical Competence

Grammatical competence is an umbrella concept that includes expertise in grammar (morphology, syntax), vocabulary and mechanics (basic sound of letters and syllabus), pronouncation of words, intonation, and stress. Grammatical competence enables speaker to use and understand English language structure accurately and unhesitatingly, which contributes to their fluency.

2. Discourse Competence

This competence is concerned with intersentential relationship. In discourse, the rules of cohesion and coherence apply which aid in holding the communication together in a meaningful way.

3. Sociolinguistic Competence

Knowledge of language alone does not adequately for effective and appropriates the use of the language. Speaker must have competence, which involves knowing what is expected socially and culturally.

4. Strategic Competence

Strategic competence is the way speakers manipulate language in order to meet communication goals (Brown: 1994). With reference to speaking, strategic competence refers to the ability to know when and how to take the floor, how to keep the conversation going, how to terminate the conversation and how to clear up communication breakdown as well as comprehension problems.

Referring to the main topic of this study which is communication strategy, we also relate it to communicative competence. Based on the explanation proposed by Canale and Swain, it is clear that communication strategy is part of strategic competence because CSs is a strategy used by people to overcome communications problems and achieve communicative goal. It means that those people who have strategy in communication, unconsciously they have communicative competence because the communication strategy belongs to the sub competencies of communicative competence which is strategic competence.

2.2.5 Communication Strategy

Many linguists have been interested in doing a research related to communication strategy. Some of them contributed to the theory of communication strategy. However, they have several differences especially in defining the term. These following have been proposed by some linguist the definitions of communication strategy.

According to Tarone, Cohen and Dumas communication strategy is „a systematic attempt by the learner to express or decode meaning in the target language, in situations where the appropriate systematic target language rules have not been formed‟ (Tarone, Cohen and Dumas, 1983)

Another perspective came from Corder. He defines communication strategy as „a systematic technique employed by a speaker to express his meaning when faced with some difficulty.‟ (Corder, 1983).

Furthermore, Tarone defines communication strategy as „a mutual attempt of two interlocutors to agree on a meaning in situations where requisite meaning structures are not shared‟ (Tarone, 1983).

Other linguists who contributed in this field are Faerch and Kasper. They see communication strategy as „potentially conscious plans for solving what to an individual present itself as a problem in reaching a particular communicative goal‟ (Faerch and Kasper, 1983).

Meanwhile, Bialystok states that communication strategy is „the dynamic interaction of the components of language processing that balance each other in their level of involvement to meet task demands‟ (Bialystok, 1990).

As well as other linguist, Poulisse defines communication strategy as „strategies which a language user employs in order to achieve his intended meaning on

becoming aware of problems arising during the planning phase of an utterance due to his own linguistic shortcomings‟ (Poulisse, 1990).

Those definitions above are always used by other researcher to do another research related to communication strategy. Thus, the writer of this research combines those theories in order to conduct the research of CSs which is related to extrovert and introvert personality.

Another researcher has viewed communication strategy as cognitive processes involved in the use of the L2 in reception and production since there are two broad theoretical approaches to communication strategies, which are discourse strategies and cognitive processes (Ellis, 1994). Moreover, Littelwood (1984) agrees that the main distinguishing characteristic of communication strategy is that it occurs when a learner becomes aware of a problem with which his current knowledge has difficulty in coping.

According to Ellis (1994:396) communication strategies (CSs) are used by learners to overcome the inadequacies of their interlanguage resources. She also explains that CSs are used primarily to deal with lexical problems, such as when a learner doesn‟t know the word for „art gallery‟, then, he refers it as a „picture place‟. Beside, CSs can also be used to get around a grammatical problem.

Dealing with Ellis‟ point of view, Littlewood (1984) explains that communication strategies are used by language speakers in order to compensate for gaps in their linguistics knowledge. Moreover, communication strategies are more likely to occur

at the level of consciousness, which are non-systematic errors.

As well as the previous definition, the researcher defines communication strategy as some strategies or some efforts which are done by speakers to overcome communication problems that may appear in speaking. For instance, people use CSs to overcome communication problems in their conversation.

2.2.6 Typology of Communication Strategy

Communication strategy has become one of interesting study for several researchers. Most of them have been successful in conducting a research of CSs. Based on their research; they have classified CSs into several terms. One of the popular researches is proposed by Tarone. Basically, it is a very fundamental typology because it is used to develop other classifications which are proposed by other researchers. Actually, Tarone‟s typology of CSs provides five strategies, namely avoidance, paraphrase, conscious transfer, appeal for assistance, and mime. Furthermore, it can be seen in the following table.

Table 2.4 Typology of Communication Strategies by Tarone's (1977)

Communication Strategy Description of Strategy 1.

2.

Avoidance

a Topic Avoidance b.Message Abandonment

Paraphrase a.Approximation

b Word Coinage

Avoiding reference to a salient object for which Learner does not have necessary vocabulary. The learner begins to refer to an object but gives Up because it is too difficult

The learner uses an item known to be incorrect but which shares some semantic features in common with the correct item (e.g. „worm‟ for „silkworm‟) The learner makes up a new word (e.g. „person

3.

4.

5.

c Circumlocution

Conscious Transfer a Literal Translation

b Language Switch

Appeal for Assistance

Mime

worm‟ to describe a picture of an animated caterpillar) The learner describes the characteristics of the Object instead of using the appropriate TL item(s)

The learner translates word for word from the

Native language (e.g. „He invites him to drink‟ in place of „They toast one another‟).

The learner inserts words from another language (e.g.„balon‟ for „balloon‟).NB Subsequently, Tarone (1981) refers to this as „borrowing‟)

The learner consults some authority-a native speaker, a dictionary.

The learner uses a nonverbal device to refer an object or event (e.g. clapping hands to indicate „applause‟).

Meanwhile, Ellis states that Tarone‟s methodology has served a basis for subsequent studies of CSs. Tarone‟s stimulated one of the aspects of „real‟ communication, that is, the situation where one of the interlocutors is a monolingual speaker of the target language. Further, in 1980, Bialystok and Fröhlich has proposed their own taxonomy of CSs. they classify CSs into three category such as L1/Other-based strategies, L2-based Strategies, Paralinguistic Strategies. Each strategy is divided into some subcategories. The explanation is provided in the following table.

Table 2.5 Typology of Communication Strategies by Bialystok and Fröhlich, 1980

Communication strategy Description of strategy 1. L1/Other-based strategies

a. Language Switch

b. Foreignizing

It refers to the insertion of a word or phrase in a language other than the target language, usually the learner‟s native language.

It is the creation Of non-existent or contextually inappropriate target language words by applying L2 morphology and/or phonology to L1 lexical items.

2.

3.

c. Transliteration

L2-based Strategies 1. Semantic Contiguity

2.Description with Reference to:

a. General Properties (color, size, spatial, dimension, material) b.Specific Features c.Interactional Functional Characteristic 3.Word Coinage Paralinguistic Strategies 1.Gestures 2.Sound Representation

It reflects the use of L2 lexicon and structure to create a (usually non-existent) translation of an L1 item or phrase.

It is defined as the use of a single lexical item which shares certain semantic features with the target item. In this case, the learner was selecting a word which more or less approximated the unknown concept. For example, stool was replaced by chair.

They indicate the information which has been incorporated into the description. The general properties refer to universal features of objects.

Specific distinguishing features are usually marked by the surface structure has, e.g, „it has four legs‟.

Interactional descriptions indicate the function of an object and the action that can be performed with it.

It is the creation of an L2 lexical item by selecting a conceptual feature of the target item and incorporating it into the L2 morphological system

Gestures or sounds occasionally.

Accompanied an utterance or were used to substitute for a verbal reference to a target item.

However, another classification proposed by Poulisse who argues that the distinction between conceptual and linguistic strategies does not refer to different processes involved in the production of these strategies. Poulisse simply proposed three categories of CSs such as substitution, substitution plus type, and reconceptualization as explained in table 2.6.

Table 2.6 Typology of Communication Strategies by Poulisse (in press):

Communication strategy Definition 1. 1.Substitution

2.Substitution Plus Type

3.Reconceptualization

Substitution of one lexical item for another, whether it be an L1for L2 item.

Substitutions which require phonological and/or morphological adaptation before they are articulated (e.g. foreignizing, morphological creativity).

A change in the preverbal message which involves more than a single chunk,(e.g. paraphrase).

Another perception comes from researchers at Nijmegen University (Kellerman, Bongaerts, and Poulisse, 1987) who have observed two major deficits in product-oriented taxonomies of communication strategies. These involve: a failure to distinguish the psychological process from the linguistic product. Therefore, they proposed an alternative taxonomy of communication strategies.

Kellerman (1991), a member of the Nijmegen group considered three fundamental conditions that are reflected in such taxonomy. The first one makes reference to its psychological plausability, in which the strategies included in this taxonomy are compatible with cognitive processing and problem-solving behavior. The second condition is parsimony. It highlights the preference for taxonomy with few strategy types, provided these are consistent with data. Then, the third condition involves the fact that taxonomy should be generalisable across tasks, items, languages and learners. This means that no strategies should be uniquely associated with certain tasks or certain items. They classify CSs into two categories, such as conceptual

archistrategy and linguistic code archistrategy. Each strategy surely has sub strategies. Further explanation can be seen in the following table.

Table 2.7 Typology of Communication Strategies by the Nijmegen group (1987):

Communication Strategy Definitions

I. Conceptual Archistrategy

a.Analytic Strategies

b.Holistic Strategies

II. linguistic/Code Archistrategy

a.Morphological Creativity morphological rules to an L2 word (e.g. grammatical word coinage) b.Transfer

Manipulating the target concept to make it expressible through available linguistic resources.

Specifying characteristic features of the concept (e.g. circumlocution).

Using a different concept which shares characteristics with the target item (e.g.approximation).

Manipulating the speakers‟ linguistic knowledge. Creating a new word by applying L2.

From another language.

Another theory comes from Littlewood perspective. The main characteristic of CSs is that it occurs when a learner becomes aware of a problem with which his current knowledge has difficulty in coping (Littlewood, 1984). Littlewood proposed more develop taxonomy which has been divided into eights strategies, they are Avoid Communication, Adjust the Message, Use Paraphrase, Use Approximation, Create New Words, Switch to the Native Language, Use Non-Linguistic Resources, and Seek Help.

Table 2.8 Typology of Communication Strategies by by Littlewood (1984)

Communication Strategy Description

Avoid Communication

Adjust the Message

Use Paraphrase

Use Approximation

Create New Words

Switch to the Native Language

Use Non-Linguistic Resources

When learners are already aware of gaps or weaknesses in their repertoire, an obvious strategy is to try to avoid occasions which will present difficulty. For example, learner may avoid participating actively in discussion since they find it difficult to present arguments in persuasive ways. When learners encounter a problem while an exchange is taking place, it‟ usually too late to use avoidance, except by simply abandoning their message half way through. However, they may decide to alter the meaning which they intended to communicate. For example, they may omit some items of information, make the ideas simpler or less precise, or say something slightly different.

A learner may use paraphrase- for example, circumlocution or description- in order to express the meaning which e wants to communicate. A learner may decide to use word which express the meaning as closely as possible, for example, instead of “pineapple”, a learner may use some fruit.

A learner may create a new word or phrase, which he hopes will express the desired meaning. A new word may be created by literally translating the elements in the native language word, or learner may create words out of second language material, with no apparent influence from the mother tongue. Rather than attempt to create a new word, a speaker may decide to simply lift a word from his own native languages. This strategy is most likely to succeed in situation where the listener has

knowledge to speaker‟s native language.

classrooms learning situation often come into this category.

Even in our native language we often use native language, we often use non-linguistic resources (e.g. mime, gesture, or imitation) to make our meanings clearer. For example, we point and say

put it there, please, or we make a gesture and say it was this kind of shape.

Seek Help A learner may seek help from outside. This may simply mean using a bilingual dictionary, or the speaker may invoke the cooperation of the listener by signaling that he is in difficulty, either directly or by indirect means such as hesitation.

Moreover, Littlewood (1984) state that some of the strategies-such as mime or the use the native language are unlikely to produce learning, except in the indirect sense that they enable the interaction to continue and perhaps elicit help from the listener. Other strategies-such as paraphrase or adjusting the message-may not help learner to expand their repertoire, but help them to become more fluent with what are they already process. Other strategies-such as seeking help or creating new words-may lead learners to gain new information about what is appropriate or permissible in the second language.

Some of taxonomy above can prove that the study of communication strategy is really interesting to be developed. There are some others taxonomy has been developed after that period. Furthermore, another classification of communication strategy has been proposed by Faerch and Kasper (1984). Their taxonomy widely developed from the previous one. Even tough they only classify the CSs into two categories, but they try to divide them into some sub categories. Basically, they have reduction strategies, and achievement strategy. They divided reduction strategy into two, such as formal reduction strategy and functional reduction strategy. Meanwhile, achievement strategy has two sub categories that are compensatory strategy and retrieval strategy. Each of them has different categories that have been explained in the following table.

Table 2.9 Typology of Communication Strategies by Faerch and Kasper (1984)

Type Explanation Example

a. Reduction Strategies

1. Formal Reduction Strategy

2. Functional Reduction Strategy

b. Achievement Strategies

1. Compensatory Strategies

a. Non-Cooperative Strategies i. L1/L3-Based Strategies - _Code Switching - _Foreignizing - _Literal Translation

ii. L2 Based Strategies

These are attempts to do away with a problem. They involve the learner giving up part of his original communicative goal.

These involve the avoidance of L2 rules of which the learner is not certain (i.e. tentative hypothesis) or which he cannot readily gain access to.

These involve the leaner avoiding certain speech acts or discourse function, avoiding or abandoning replacing certain topics, and avoiding modality markers.

These are activated when the learner decides to keep to the original communicative goal but compensates for insufficient mean or makes the effort to retrieve the required items. These are compensatory strategies which do not call for the assistance of the interlocutor.

The learner makes use of a language than the l2.

The learner uses a form in the non-L2 language.

The learner uses a non L2 form but adapts it to make it appear like a L2 form.

The learner translates an L1/ L3 form.

The learner makes use of alternative L2 forms.

The learner replaces one L2 form with another.

He made him to go….

He asked him t go…

He plays… He doe sport

I don‟t have any Geschwester. Danish „papirkurv‟ „papercurve‟ Danish „gronstager‟ (=vegetables) „Green thing‟

- _Substitution

- _Paraphrase

- _{Word Coinage}

- _{Restructuring}

iii. Non-Linguistic Strategies

b. Co-operative Strategies i. Direct Appeal ii. Indirect Appeal

2. Retrieval Strategies a. Waiting

b. Using Semantic Field

c. Using other Languages

The learner replaces an L2 item by describing or exemplifying it.

The learner replaces an L2 item with an item made up from L2 forms.

The learner develops an alternative constituent plan.

The learner compensates, using non-linguistic mean such as mime or gesture.

These involve a joint problem-solving effort by the learner and his interlocutor.

The learner overtly request assistance. The learner does not request assistance, but indicates the need for help by means of a pause, eye gaze, etc.

These are used when the learner has a problem locating the required item but decides to preserve rater than use a compensatory strategy.

The learner waits for the item to come to him.

The learner identifies the semantic field to witch the item belongs and runs through items belonging to this field until he locates the item.

The learner thinks of form the item in another language and then translates it into the L2.

Rabbit animal

He cleaned the house with a… It sucks an air.

Gallery-picture place

I have two… I have a brother and sister.

Dornyei (1995) has proposed his own taxonomy. According to him, the categorization of communication strategies consists of avoidance strategies (reduction strategy), compensatory strategies (achievement strategy), and time gaining strategy. Each of classification has divided into some sub-classifications. Avoidance strategy is divided into message abandonment and topic avoidance. Besides, compensatory strategy is divided into circumlocution, approximation, use of all-purpose words, word coinage, nonlinguistic signals, literal translation, Foreignizing, Code-switching, and Appeal for help. Moreover, stalling or time-gaining strategy only has one sub category which is using fillers or hesitation devices. Then, the explanation is as follow:

A. Avoidance Strategies/Reduction Strategy

It can be classified as follow:

a) Message abandonment: Leaving a message unfinished because of language difficulties.

b) Topic avoidance: Avoiding topic areas or concepts that pose language difficulties.

B. Compensatory Strategies/ Achievement Strategy

It can be classified as follow:

a) Circumlocution: Describing or exemplifying the target object of action (e.g. the thing you open bottles with for corkscrew).

b) Approximation: Using an alternative term which expresses the meaning of the target lexical item as closely as possible (e.g. ship for sailboat).

c) Use of all-purpose words: Extending a general, empty lexical item to contexts where specific words are lacking (e.g. the overuse of thing, stuff, what-do-you call–it, thingie).

d) Word coinage: Creating a nonexisting L2 word based on a supposed rule (e.g., vegetarianist for vegetarian).

e) Nonlinguistic signals: Mime, gesture, facial expression, or sound imitation.

f) Literal translation: Translating literally a lexical item, idiom, compound word, or structure from L1 to L2.

g) Foreignizing: Using a L1 word by adjusting it to L2 phonology (i.e., with a L2 pronunciation) and/or morphology (e.g., adding to it a L2 suffix).

h) Code-switching: Using a L1 word with L1 pronunciation or a L3 word with L3 pronunciation while speaking in L2.

i) Appeal for help: Asking for aid from the interlocutor either directly (e.g., what do you call…?) or indirectly (e.g., rising intonation, pause, eye contact, puzzled expression).

C. Stalling or time-gaining strategies

a. Using fillers or hesitation devices; it is to fill pauses and to gain time to think (e.g., well, now, let‟s see, uh, as a matter of fact).

To sum up this, the researcher has found several theories of CSs‟ typology. Some of them have been proposed by, Tarone, Bialystok and Frohlich, Poulisse, Littlewood, Nijmgen and group. Even if there are some similarity among those taxonomy, but the differences are also exist. However, Tarone‟s taxonomy has been widely used as a basis for subsequent studies of CSs. Meanwhile, Dorney‟s taxonomy is more developed theory. Thus, the researcher will use Dorney‟s taxonomy in order to analyze and categorize the communication strategies of extrovert students and introvert students as the purpose of this study.

2.2.7 Factors Affecting Choice of Communication Strategies

Some previous researchers have found that the choice of communication strategies has close correlations with various factors, such as; learner‟s level of language proficiency, learner‟s personality, the situation of use. Furthermore, the explanation can be seen in the following:

1. Learner‟s Level of Language Proficiency

Some previous researcher noted that language proficiency of learners may affect the choice of CSs. Bialystock (1997) stated that the first factor that may be expected to predict the choice of a specific communication strategy is the proficiency level of the speaker. Meanwhile, Hyde (1982) who found that lower level students make more frequent use of CS than more proficient ones because they encounter more problems in communication due to their more limited command of the target language. Since this study focused on analyzing extrovert and introvert students who have different level of speaking ability, it was assumed that extrovert used fewer CSs than introvert

students. It is due to the fact that extrovert students have better speaking ability than introvert students.

2. Learner‟s Personality

Personality of learners also can affect the choice of CSs. Tarone (1977) stated that personality is highly related to the choice of communicative strategies. Meanwhile, Corder (1978) also stated that learners with risk-avoiding personalities prefer reduction strategies and learners with risk-taking personalities prefer achievement strategies. Dealing with this study which focused on extroversion and introversion, it was assumed that extrovert students and introvert students may have different choice of CSs.

3. Learning Situation

Learning situation is also one of the factors affecting the choice of CSs. Ellis (1985) states that learners may use fewer strategies in a classroom environment than in a natural one, particularly if the pedagogical focus is on correct L2 rules rather than in fluent communication. Recent studies indicate that the different situation might, to a certain degree, affect the learners‟ choice of CSs (see e.g. Rababah, 2002).

2.3 Theoretical Assumption

In classroom, while the students are learning language, they have to master four skills which are listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Meanwhile, it‟s difficult to find out the students who have equal achievement in those skills. One of the causes may

come from personality factor which extrovert and introvert who have unequal achievement in speaking.

Davies (2004: 541) states that out of eight studies that employ oral language test, six of them show that extroverts perform better than introverts. Then, Furnham (1990) concludes from his study and subsequent observations that extroverts are more impulsive and take more risks with speech than introverts. Introverts are more careful with speech and more focused more on form: vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation.

By seeing the result from previous study, the researcher assumed that extrovert and introvert students had different choice of CSs since their characteristics and their ability in speaking are different. It was also speculated that CSs mostly used by them are also different. Therefore, this research was conducted in order to prove it.

III. RESEARCH METHOD

In this chapter, the writer illustrates the research method used in this study. It covers Research Designs, Subject of the Research, Data Collecting Technique, Research Procedures, and Data Analysis. Moreover, the explanation will be in the following.

3.1Research Designs

Actually, this study was aimed to analyze CSs used by extrovert and introvert students. Thus, it used qualitative design which is taxonomic analysis to analyze the

data. It used Dorney’s taxonomic of CSs which consist of twelve strategies. They are

message abandonment, topic avoidance, circumlocution, approximation, use of all-purpose words, word coinage, nonlinguistic signals, literal translation, foreignizing, code-switching, appeal for help, and using fillers or hesitation devices.

Furthermore, the researcher provided questionnaire to pose them into independent variable. Questionnaire should be answered by the students. Based on the result of the questionnaire, the writer had classified the students into three groups; introvert, medium, and extrovert. The test was in form of conversation and it was chosen to make the data more reliable.

3.2Population and Sample

This research had involved students in the second semester of the second grade, academic year 2012-2013, at SMAN 10 Bandar Lampung. There are nine classes of the second grade which are divided into two groups, science and social. There are four classes of science and five classes of social. Each class consists of 36 students. Since the researcher decided to use random sampling, the sample was students of one class from science. The researcher assumed that there are many times for them to have speaking activity in the class. It means that they have ability in showing their ability in communication. Thus, they are appropriate to be the participants. Meanwhile, the sample was chosen only one class which is XI science one.

3.3 Data Collecting Technique

The researcher attempted to get the data by using several instruments as follow:

3.3.1 Questionnaire

The students were given a questionnaire consisting of 28 items. They were given 15 minutes to answer it. It was aimed to clasifiy them to the type of personality. From the questionnaire, the researcher could see whether they are extrovert or introvert. The questionnaire was translated into Bahasa Indonesia in order to avoid misinterpretation by the students.

Herdawan (2012) has modified original questionnaire which consists of 42 items. SPSS 15 was used to see the reliability coefficient of the questionnaire. 14 items were dropped from the questionnaire in order to get more reliable set of questions in the

questionnaire. It also has been tested previously which means the questionnaire has been valid and reliable to use. So, this research used a set of questionnaire which has been modified.

The questionnaire has 4 options for each question. It also consists of positive and negative wordings. The positive wordings are written in bold form. The scoring system is as follow:

Positive wording : a = 1, b = 2, c = 3, d = 4 Negative Wording : a = 4, b = 3, c = 2, d = 1

Further explanation could be seen by looking at the following table:

Table 3.1 Table of Specification (Questionnaire)

Items Number

Personality

Total Items

Percentage of Items Extroversion Introversion

Sanguine Choleric Phlegmatic Melancholic 3,4,7,9,10,

12,14,15, 18,21, 24

√ 11 39%

1,13,25,

26,27 √ 5 18%

2,5,17,

20,22 √ 5 18%

6,8,11,

16,19,28 √ 6 25%

Table of Specification (Questionnaire)

After getting the result of the questionnaire, the writer had classified the students based on their extroversion level. The highest score that could be achieved by the students is 112. The higher their scores are, the more extroverted they are. The students who got 72 or more total score were classified into extrovert group. Those

whose scores lower than 56 were classified into introvert group. When their scores were 57 to 71, they were classified as medium.

3.3.2 Data Elicitation Technique

In this study, the researcher used language learning tasks as data elicitation technique. Moreover, tasks design to elicit data for communication strategies are different for the study of input and negotiations. Yufrizal (2008) has stated some of the tasks are picture description (Byalistok and Frochlich, 1980: Varadi, 1980), picture reconstruction (Byalistok, 1983), translation (Galvan and Campbell, 1979); sentence completion (Blum-Kulka and Lavenston, 1983); conversation (Haastrup and Phillipson, 1983), narration (Raupach, 1983); instruction (Wagner, 1983), word transmission (Parbakht, 1985), and interview (Raupach, 1983).

Based on the theory above, this study used spontaneous conversation in order to elicit data of CSs. it is due to the fact that language mostly used spontaneously in real conversation of daily life. Therefore, the researcher made the situation as natural as possible in order to get authentic data.

3.3.3 Recording

The conversation of those pairs had been recorded by using camera video. The researcher used different camera to record them in order to make the data easily analyze. Recording was also aimed in order to help the researcher to do next step which was transcribing. Since, mime, gesture, and facial expression were needed in transcribing, so it was beneficial to record everything in the conversation. Besides, it

was needed in order to analyze data related to the communication strategy that they used.

3.3.4 Transcribing

After recording the conversation, the researcher needed to make the transcription. However, it should be transcribed in detail. Everything that the students said and did in the conversation should be transcribed. It was aimed to get more valid data about the activity done by the participants. It was also needed to help the researcher in analyzing the data coming from that activity.

3.3.5 Coding

Some communication strategies may appear in students’ conversation and it could be

seen in transcribing. The next step was coding in which the finding of CSs was categorized into Dorney’s taxonomy as in table 3.2.

Table 3.2 Coding of Communication Strategies

Communication Strategy Coding

1.

2.

A. Avoidance Strategies

a) Message Abandonment b) Topic Avoidance B. Compensatory Strategies

a) Circumlocution b) Approximation

c) Use of all-purpose words d) Word Coinage

e) Nonlinguistic Signals f) Literal Translation g) Foreignizing

h) Code-Switching i) Appeal for Help

j) Stalling or time-gaining strategies

MA TA C APP UW WC NS LT F CS AH TG

3.3.6 Analyzing

After transcribing the data from recording, the researcher found what strategies appeared in that conversation. Those strategies were analyzed and it was categorized

by using Dorney’s taxonomy of communication strategy. The researcher counted the

number of CSs of extrovert and introvert students. Meanwhile, the percentage of CSs was counted as well. Then, the researcher found which CSs are frequently used by extrovert students and introvert students.

3.4 Validity and Reliability of the Questionnaire

Validity is a matter of relevance; it means that the test measures what is claimed to measure. To measure validity of the test, it can be analyzed from its face validity, content validity and construct validity. Face validity concerns with how the test looks. Meanwhile, content validity concerned wit whether the test is sufficiently representative for the rest of test or not. While construct validity focuses on the relationship between indicators within the test.

Reliability refers to the consistency of the measure. A test is said to be reliable if its scores remain relatively stable from one administration to another (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:144).

3.4.1 Validity of the Questionnaire

Face validity of the questionnaire is achieved by arranging the questionnaire into the form of multiple choice-like arrangements. It makes it easier to the students to

understand when they try to answer the questionnaire. That is why the researcher used face validity in the questionnaire.

The content validity of the instrument used by the writer is questionnaire which is already achieved by simply looking at the table of specification. It is clear that the questionnaire measures the extraversion level of the students.

Meanwhile, the construct validity of the questionnaire is achieved by looking at the relationship between indicators. If the indicators measure the same aspect, they would have positive association. While negative association would be shown among indicators that measure different aspects.

3.4.2 Reliability of the Questionnaire

The result of the questionnaire is scored based on Likert scale with range of score is 1 to 4. Besides, in order to measure the consistency of the questionnaire’s items, the writer used Cronbach Alpha Coefficient since it is the most commonly used one. The alpha ranges between 0 and 1. The higher the alpha, the more reliable the questionnaire is. The following scale is used to classify the reliability of the questionnaire:

a. Between 0.800 to 1.00 = very high reliability b. Between 0.600 to 0.800 = high reliability c. Between 0.400 to 0.600 = moderate reliability d. Between 0.200 to 0.400 = low reliability e. Between 0.000 to 0.200 = very low reliability

should make a conversation spontaneously based on the situation given by the researcher. Before having a conversation, the students were given a direction as guidance for them to make a conversation. The direction was as follows:

Direction:

1. You are falling in love with a girl/boy. You want her/him to know about your feeling. In this situation, you ask her/him to be you girlfriend/boyfriend. Then, you have to see whether she/he has a similar feeling to you.

2. Your friend is so sad because she/he lost her/his blackberry. In your conversation, you may ask about when it happened, where it happened, so on. Besides, you also may ask about the type of blackberry which has lost, its price, its feature, and so on.

Those two expressions were taken based on curriculum and syllabus for the second grade of Senior High School students in this semester. Thus, the researcher used them as topics for this research as well.

3.5.4 Recording

After having their own partner, the students should be ready to have a conversation. When they were talking, everything they mentioned or told in conversation should be recorded perfectly. It was done in order to help the researcher do the next steps which were transcribing, coding, and analyzing. It was due to the fact that after recording,

the researcher should transcribe the conversation before coding and analyzing. So, recording was very important to do.

3.5.5 Transcribing, Coding, and Analyzing

Analyzing was one of the important parts in this research because this research would not successfully show the result of the topic if there was no analyzing. The researcher found some communication strategies after analyzing the data. Conversely, analyzing the data would not be successfully done if there was no transcription. Therefore, transcribing and analyzing were needed in this research. After transcribing the CSs, the next step was coding in which the researcher classified the CSs into coding table that had been prepared.

3.5.6 Concluding the Data

The researcher had decided to use Dorney’s taxonomy in analyzing the result of findings. Then, the result should be categorized into taxonomy of communication

strategy based on Dorney’s taxonomy. Thus, the researcher could make a conclusion

about what communication strategy of extrovert and introvert students.

3.6Data Analysis

The researcher analyzed the data as in the following;

1. Analyzing the Questionnaire

The researcher analyzed the questionnaire which was distributed to the students. It was needed to categorize them into extrovert, introvert, and medium. The students who got 72 or more total score were classified into extrovert group. Those whose

scores lower than 56 were classified into introvert group. When their scores were 57 to 71, they were classified as medium. However, this research only focused on analyzing the students with extrovert and introvert personality.

2. Transcribing and Coding

The researcher transcribed the conversation which was done by the students after being classified into extrovert and introvert personality. Then, the researcher tried to find CSs used by them and made a coding for every strategy that they used. Moreover, it should be done based on Dorney’s taxonomy of CSs.

3. Analyzing CSs

After transcribing and coding, the researcher analyzed what CSs used by extrovert and introvert students. Then, number of CSs used by both of groups also should be accounted. It was needed to find which communication strategies used frequently by each group.

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This final chapter offers the conclusion of the research findings and suggestions for the next similar research.

5.1 Conclusions

Referring to the discussion of the research in the previous chapter, the researcher comes to these following conclusions:

1. Based on Dorney’s Taxonomic of CSs, there are nine CSs used by both

groups in SMAN 10 Bandar Lampung. They are message abandonment, topic avoidance, approximation, use all of purpose words, nonlinguistic signals, code switching, literal translation, appeal for help, and time gaining strategy. Meanwhile, extrovert students tend to use appeal for help frequently. On the other hand, introvert students mostly use time gaining strategy in the conversation.

2. There are 138 CSs used by extrovert students and introvert students. The researcher finds 86 strategies have been used by introvert students. Meanwhile, extrovert students have only used 52 CSs. It means that introvert students use more CSs than extrovert students.

3. It can be conluded that extrovert students tend to be more risk taking, confident, and focus on the task. Meanwhile, the introvert students tend to be more nervous and afraid of making mistakes. They cannot concentrate well while they perform the conversation. Thus, they used more strategies than extrovert students.

5.2 Suggestions

Based on the conclusions above, the writer gives some suggestions as follow:

5.2.1 Suggestions for the Teacher

1. Since the introvert students tend to avoid risk in communication, the teacher should encourage them to be willing to take risks in speaking and use CSs by giving them more chance to practice speaking.

2. Since Indonesian students may not understand about CSs. It is better for the teacher to provide L2 models of the use of certain CSs to overcome their communication problem.

3. After being taught about CSs, teacher can provide opportunities for practice in strategy use while they practice speaking.

5.2.2 Suggestions for Further Research

a. This research has focused in communication strategy. Other research can try to analyze learning strategy of extroversion in four different skills, such as listening, speaking, reading, and writing.

b. In this research, the writer has used conversation as the tool to analyze communication strategy of extrovert and introvert students. Further research can use other tests to get more reliable data about CSs of the subjects, such as role play, interview, picture description, and so on.

c. Applied a questionnaire in a different way can be a good idea. For instance, the questionnaire is given to a student where the student is required to give his opinion on his one particular friend. It may cause lower chance for them to fake their personality.