BCP Education & Psychology ERHSS 2022 Volume 6 (2022) 88 The Relationship among Chinese High School Students’ Listening Metacognitive Awareness, Foreign Language Enjoyment and Listening Performance Yicheng Cai School of Foreign Studies, Jiangnan University, Jiangsu, 214122, China 1121190511@stu.jiangnan.edu.cn Abstract. Although the importance of listening metacognitive awareness in foreign language listening has been widely accepted, so far, there has been little research on its relationship with foreign language enjoyment (FLE) and listening performance. Since listening is an important input language skill in the primary stage of language learning, this study examines the relationships among metacognitive awareness, FLE and listening performance of 331 Chinese senior high school students through Metacognitive Awareness of Listening Questionnaire (MALQ) and the Chinese Version of the Foreign Language Enjoyment Scale. The results demonstrate that: 1) the listening metacognitive awareness of the participants was of medium and high level; 2) the listening metacognitive awareness and listening performance were significantly correlated, and the high and low listening performance groups exhibited significant differences in listening metacognitive awareness; 3) FLE had significant positive effects on listening performance, and listening metacognitive awareness could indirectly facilitate listening performance by affecting FLE, that is, FLE had mediation effect between listening metacognitive awareness and listening performance. Pedagogical suggestions for English listening are provided. Keywords: listening metacognitive awareness; foreign language enjoyment; listening performance. 1. Introduction As an input language skill, listening plays an important role in foreign language learning. With the development of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) in the field of listening, the important role of metacognition has attracted more and more attention from scholars both at home and abroad. However, non-intellectual factors, especially positive academic emotions, are rarely taken into account because they are not directly involved in cognitive process. In recent years, positive psychology (PP) has been introduced into SLA research, and scholars have begun to re-examine the role of positive academic emotion for language learning. However, there is a lack of research related to listening. This study investigated Chinese senior high school students who were in the primary stage of English learning to exam the relationship among listening metacognitive awareness, FLE and listening performance. 2. Literature Review 2.1 Listening metacognitive awareness Metacognition was first defined by Flavell (1976) as the monitoring of learning participants’ cognitive activities, which mainly includes metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive control (Flavell, 1979; Brown & Palinscar, 1982). In listening, metacognitive awareness generally refers to metacognitive knowledge (Vandergrift et al. 2006) (quoted from Zhang Zhenghou et al., 2013). Flavell (1979) pointed out that metacognitive knowledge is a part of the knowledge about the world stored by people (children and adults) who are cognitive creatures, which is related to individuals and their cognitive tasks, goals, actions and experiences. It has three sub-categories: personal knowledge, task knowledge and strategy knowledge. Wenden (1986, 1998) modified the metacognitive knowledge model of Flavell (1979) from the perspective of linguistics, and proposed that in the field of SLA, personal knowledge is the general knowledge about human factors (age, talent, etc.) in the BCP Education & Psychology ERHSS 2022 Volume 6 (2022) 89 learning process, and the special knowledge, learning ability, motivation and belief of how human factors affect their own learning; task knowledge refers to the learning participant’s understanding of the purpose and requirements of the task; Strategy knowledge refers to learners’ knowledge of the effectiveness and applicable conditions of various language learning strategies. Goh (1997) was the first to link metacognitive awareness with second language listening. Through the study of Chinese students’ English listening logs, he further analyzed listening metacognitive awareness and found that listening metacognitive awareness plays an important role in improving listening performance. Based on the metacognitive process model proposed by Wenden in 1998, Vandergrift et al. designed the metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire (MALQ), which has been widely used. Since then, a large number of relevant studies have indicated that listening metacognitive awareness play a role in learners’ listening performance, learning motivation and confidence (Goh & Taib, 2006; Vandergrift & Tafaghodtari, 2010; Shen Yunhua, Zhang Jun, 2016, etc.), and has a positive impact on the information processing of foreign language listening (Coskun, 2010). Among them, ‘personal knowledge’ and ‘directed attention’ in metacognitive knowledge model are the most significant factors (Yu Cuihong, 2014; Chang Pengyun, 2016). However, previous studies on listening metacognitive awareness lacked the investigation of non-intellectual factors (Deng Qiaoling, 2015), especially positive academic emotions. In recent years, as emotion research has become a new hot spot, people at home and abroad have begun to pay attention to a variety of emotional experiences in second language learning (Dewaele & Li, 2020). Whether metacognitive awareness affects the listening performance indirectly by affecting the positive academic emotion apart from its direct impact on listening performance is worth investigating. 2.2 Foreign language enjoyment MacIntyre & Gregersen (2012) first introduced PP into SLA and proposed that positive emotions can improve learners’ ability to focus on new things and help learners receive more language input information. FLE refers to the state in which learners’ psychological needs are met, which can release the language learning potential of adults as well as children (Dewaele & MacIntyre, 2014, 2016). It is the core emotion that has attracted much attention in the field of SLA (Teimouri, 2018). Based on Pekrun’s (2006) control-value theory, enjoyment is a positive activity-related emotion which can effectively improve learners’ cognition, regulate motivation and learning behavior, and contribute to academic achievement. Empirical studies by Dewaele & Alfawzan (2018) and Li Chengchen (2020) demonstrated that FLE would positively predict foreign language achievement. Dong Lianqi and Liu Meihua (2022) found that FLE significantly positively indirectly predicted foreign language achievement through the mediating effect of foreign language use and expectancy component of motivation. At present, the widely accepted FLE measurement tool is the foreign language enjoyment scale (FLES) designed by Dewaele & Macintyre (2014). Based on the conceptual structure FLE of Chinese high school English learners, Li et al. (2018) adapted FLES locally and designed the Chinese version of foreign language enjoyment scale (CFLES). The scale has been used in empirical research with Chinese learners as samples (e.g., Wei et al., 2019; Wei Xiaobao et al., 2021). Since affective filtering hypothesis was put forward (Krashen, 1985), negative emotions have been the focus of SLA research at home and abroad. Compared with foreign language anxiety, the research on FLE in China starts late and lacks effective empirical research. In addition, some existing studies only regard enjoyment as the lack of anxiety, ignoring the role of enjoyment itself. Moreover, foreign language teaching has long focused on cultivating learners’ cognitive ability, while there is less discussion on the interaction between learners’ emotional factors and cognitive factors (dewaele & Li, 2020). In view of the important impact of foreign language enjoyment as a positive academic emotion on learners’ thinking-action repertoire, individual happiness, academic process and achievement both in short-term and long-term (Li Chengchen, 2020), how enjoyment interacts with metacognitive awareness in the process of foreign language learning and affect language performance should be discussed. BCP Education & Psychology ERHSS 2022 Volume 6 (2022) 90 3. Research design 3.1 Research questions This paper mainly discusses the relationship among Chinese high school students’ listening metacognitive awareness, FLE and listening performance. It aims to address the following three research questions: RQ1: What is the general level of Chinese senior high school students’ listening metacognitive awareness and FLE? RQ2: Is Chinese senior high school students’ English listening performance related to listening metacognitive awareness? Are there differences in metacognitive awareness between high-score students and low-score students? RQ3: What is the relationship among Chinese senior high school students’ listening metacognitive awareness, FLE and listening performance? 3.2 Participants Participants were 331 senior one students in a middle school in Zhejiang province, China, aged from 15 to 18. All participants have been learning English at school since their third year at primary school. Participants were divided into high-score group (n = 95) and low-score group (n = 94) according to their listening test scores. 3.3 Instruments 3.3.1 Metacognitive Awareness of Listening Questionnaire The metacognitive awareness of listening questionnaire of this study was modified after MALQ designed by Vandergrift et al. (2006). Based on descriptive studies of metacognitive awareness, Vandergrift et al. (2006) combined theories of foreign language listening with practice, and designed MALQ after repeated examine and modification (Yu Cuihong, 2014). Its reliability and validity were tested acceptable. Based on the metacognitive knowledge model (Flavell, 1979) and the metacognitive process model (Wenden, 1998), the questionnaire divides listening metacognitive awareness into five sub-categories: ‘problem solving’, ‘planning‐evaluation’, ‘mental translation’, ‘directed attention’ and ‘person knowledge’. In this study, the questionnaire was translated into Chinese and slightly adjusted according to the results of the pilot study (n = 88). Each item was responded to on a standard 5-point Likert scale ranging from ‘1 = strongly disagree’ to ‘5 = strongly agree’. 3.3.2 Foreign Language Enjoyment Scale This study adopted the Chinese Version of the Foreign Language Enjoyment Scale by Li et al. (2018), which had ideal reliability and validity. It had subscales of FLE-Private, FLE-Teacher, and FLE-Atmosphere (Li Chengchen, 2020). The options of the scale were in the form of Likert five scale, and the situation of some items was set as "English listening time". Each item was responded to on a standard 5-point Likert scale and some of the item was set as ‘While listening English’. 3.3.3 Listening test The listening scores of this study were the average scores of the participants’ English listening scores in the three recent large-scale official exams in their middle school. Its difficulty and question type were equivalent to the English listening of the current national college entrance examination, which reflected listening performance with adequate accuracy. The style of questions was multiple- choice: 5 short dialogues, 5 long dialogues or monologues and 15 questions, which are 20 questions and 30 points in total, and 1.5 points for each question. This study took the average score of three English listening test as the grouping standard: 25 points and above as the high-score group, and 22 and below as the low-score group. BCP Education & Psychology ERHSS 2022 Volume 6 (2022) 91 3.4 Data collection and analysis The MALQ and the foreign language enjoyment scale were both printed in paper and distributed and collected by their teachers. The participants needed to fill in the options on the answer sheet. Each answer sheet was pasted with bar code number, and the data collection was completed by machine scanning. After excluding the questionnaires and scales that do not meet the requirements (choosing more or less options), this study collected 276 effective MALQ and 318 foreign language enjoyment scales. In the data processing stage, items 3, 8 and 16 of MALQ were coded in reverse order because the wording is semantically opposite to other items. Besides, three items of ‘mental translation’ also adopted reverse coding because there was a negative correlation between them and listening metacognitive awareness (Vandergrift et al., 2006). According to the proposal of Goh and Hu in 2014, the comprehensive metacognitive awareness level of listening (MALQ score) was calculated by adding the average value of each subscale as the score of five factor variables. Internal consistency of MALQ and the scale was assessed by using Cronbach’s Alpha. The alphas for MALQ, ‘problem solving’, ‘planning‐evaluation’, ‘mental translation’, ‘directed attention’, and ‘person knowledge’ were 0.75, 0.82, 0.73, 0.62, 0.69, and 0.61 respectively, indicating that the items could be used in further analysis. All items in the foreign language enjoyment scale were positively worded questions. The foreign language enjoyment level was the sum of each items’ score. The alphas for the Foreign Language Enjoyment Scale, the subscales of FLE-Private, FLE-Teacher, and FLE- Atmosphere were 0.90, 0.86, 0.87, 0.84 respectively, which demonstrated that the items had high reliability and were appropriate for this research. All data were processed by Pearson correlation analysis, independent samples t-test and regression analysis via SPSS 26.0. 4. Results and discussion 4.1 The general level of listening metacognitive awareness and FLE The general level of listening metacognitive awareness (n = 276) and FLE (n = 318) of the participants is illustrated in Table 4.1. On a standard 5-point Likert scale, an average score higher than 3.5 indicates high-frequency, equal to or lower than 2.4 shows low-frequency, and between them indicates medium-frequency (Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995). Table 4.1 Descriptive statistics of listening metacognitive awareness and FLE Min Max M SD MALQ score 2.00 4.31 3.1886 0.39086 Problem Solving 1.00 5.00 3.5181 0.76849 Planning‐Evaluation 1.00 5.00 3.0116 0.76649 Mental Translation 1.00 5.00 2.7826 0.82697 Directed Attention 1.00 5.00 3.7274 0.77353 Person Knowledge 1.00 5.00 2.8483 0.95008 FLE 1.00 5.00 3.2396 0.78084 FLE-P 1.00 5.00 3.0405 0.94476 FLE-T 1.00 5.00 4.0021 0.87166 FLE-A 1.00 5.00 2.8091 0.99013 Note. FLE-P: ‘FLE-Private’, FLE-T: ‘FLE-Teacher’, FLE-A: ‘FLE-Atmosphere’ Table 4.1 shows that in terms of metacognitive awareness of listening, the score of ‘directed attention’ is the highest (M = 3.73), and ‘problem solving’ is followed (M = 3.52); ‘mental translation’ scored the lowest (M = 2.78). The participants’ MALQ score is at the medium level, and the five types of listening metacognitive awareness are at the medium or high level. In terms of enjoyment, BCP Education & Psychology ERHSS 2022 Volume 6 (2022) 92 ‘FLE-Teacher’ was the highest (M = 4.00). The general level of FLE (M = 3.24), ‘FLE-Private’ (M = 3.04) and ‘FLE-Atmosphere’ (M = 2.81) are at a medium level. 4.2 Correlations between MALQ Factors and listening performance Table 4.2 is the result of Pearson correlation analysis between participants’ MALQ score, five types of listening metacognitive awareness and listening performance. Table 4.2 MALQ Factors correlations for the Exploratory listening performance (N = 276) Factor r p MALQ score 0.419*** 0.000 Problem Solving 0.256*** 0.000 Planning‐Evaluation 0.205** 0.001 Mental Translation -0.078 0.201 Directed Attention 0.285*** 0.000 Person Knowledge 0.340*** 0.000 Note. *** p < 0.001, * p < 0.01 As shown in Table 2, the participants’ MALQ score was significantly positively correlated with their listening performance (|r| = 0.419 > 0.4, P < 0.001); among the five types of metacognitive awareness of listening, except ‘mental translation’, there was a significant positive correlation with listening performance (P < 0.01). It is noteworthy that among the five dimensions, ‘person knowledge’ has the highest correlation with listening performance (|r| = 0.340 > 0.2, P < 0.001), which is consistent with the research results of Deng Qiaoling (2015) and Goh & Hu (2014), that is, ‘person knowledge’ is the most important correlation factor of listening performance, indicating that self- efficacy, self-confidence and motivation have a positive correlation with listening performance. In addition, ‘mental translation’ has no significant correlation with listening performance. In order to investigate whether there are differences in the listening metacognitive awareness level between participants from high-score group (n = 95) and low-score group (n = 95), this study adopts independent samples t-test (Table 4.3). Table 4.3 t-test results of MALQ Factors Factor F t p MALQ score 1.075 6.916 0.000 Problem Solving 1.709 3.775 0.000 Planning‐Evaluation 5.762 2.392 0.018 Mental Translation 6.079 -1.174 0.242 Directed Attention .297 4.106 0.000 Person Knowledge 3.001 6.801 0.000 Table 4.2 shows that there were significant differences between high-score group and low-score group in MALQ score and four types of listening metacognitive awareness except ‘mental translation’ (P < 0.05). The high-score group exceeded low-score group in MALQ score (t = 6.916 > 0), "problem solving" (t = 3.775 > 0), "plan evaluation" (t = 2.392 > 0), "guiding attention" (t = 4.106 > 0) and ‘person knowledge’ (t = 6.801 > 0), which was consistent with the research results of Deng Qiaoling (2015). However, there was no significant difference in ‘mental translation’ in the five types of listening metacognitive awareness between two groups (P = 0.242 > 0.05), which was inconsistent with the research results of Zhang Yongzheng and Yu Cuihong (2015)’s study on undergraduates and Shen Yunhua and Zhang Jun (2016)’s study on postgraduates. Both studies indicated that low-score learners were more dependent on ‘mental translation’, a strategy which hinders listening comprehension. The reason may be that the participants of this study were senior-one students, who were in the primary stage of English learning and had limited vocabulary and phonetic knowledge. As put forward by Shen Yunhua and Zhang Jun (2016), “the participants did not achieve automation in ‘formal-meaning matching’ in listening texts”, so they were more dependent on translating words BCP Education & Psychology ERHSS 2022 Volume 6 (2022) 93 and sentences into mother tongue in order to understand the text. Meanwhile, the listening text capacity was small at this stage, and the time delay of information input and output caused by the semantic transformation between the two languages would not hinder listening comprehension. Yu Cuihong and Zhang Yongzheng (2014) conducted diachronic research on the listening metacognitive awareness and listening performance of English majors and non-English majors in a university for one and a half semesters, and found that ‘mental translation’ had a positive impact on the listening performance at the beginning of the study. With the development of participants’ listening ability, the impact becomes negative. This study shows that ‘mental translation’ has different regulatory effects on listening comprehension at different stages of English learning, which supports the results of the current study. 4.3 Correlation analysis between listening metacognitive awareness, FLE and listening performance Pearson correlation analysis of listening metacognitive awareness, FLE and listening performance is demonstrated in Table 4.4. Table 4.4 FLE Factors correlations for listening metacognitive awareness, FLE and listening performance (N = 268) LP MALQ Score PS PE MT DA PK FLE r 0.218** 0.463** 0.570** 0.586** -0.323** 0.431** -0.025 p 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.680 FLE-P r 0.280** 0.556** 0.600** 0.634** -0.341** 0.482** 0.080 p 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.192 FLE-T r 0.107 0.212** 0.369** 0.273** -0.179** 0.287** -0.144* p 0.082 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.019 FLE-A r 0.088 0.266** .368** 0.447** -0.234** 0.225** -0.075 p 0.152 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.223 Note. ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05, LP: listening performance, PS: ‘problem solving’, PE: ‘planning‐evaluation’, MT: ‘mental translation’, DA: ‘directed attention’, PK: ‘person knowledge’ Previous studies mostly focused on foreign language comprehensive achievement and FLE, most of which reached the conclusion that FLE positively predicted foreign language achievement (Dewaele & Alfawzan, 2018; Jiang & Dwaele, 2019; Li Chengchen, 2020, etc.). As illustrated on Table 4.4, this study concentrated on the listening module rather than comprehensive English skills and found that the participants’ FLE was significantly positively correlated with their listening performance as well (P < 0.01), indicating that FLE not only positively affected their comprehensive foreign language achievement, it was also an important related factor of listening module. Meanwhile, this study found that among the three dimensions of FLE, only ‘FLE-Private’ was significantly correlated with listening performance (P < 0.01), indicating that the positive effect of FLE on listening performance was mainly realized by ‘FLE-Private’, while ‘FLE-Teacher’ and ‘FLE-Atmosphere’ had no significant effect (P > 0.05). In addition, FLE was positively correlated with MALQ score (|r| = 0.463 > 0.4, P < 0.01), and the former was positively correlated with other items, except ‘mental translation’ (|r| = 0.323 > 0.2, P < 0.01) which was negatively correlated. Besides, FLE had no significant correlation with ‘person knowledge’ (P > 0.05). Among them, ‘planning‐evaluation’ has the most significant correlation with FLE (|r| = 0.586 > 0.4, P < 0.01), followed by ‘problem solving’ (|r| = 0.570 > 0.4, P < 0.01). This indicated that the participants’ initiative in the process of organizing, planning, monitoring and adjusting listening activities had a significant positive effect on FLE. The participants’ listening task planning, listening result evaluation, compensatory strategy awareness were the effective predictive variables of FLE. To sum up, the possible explanations for the relationship among listening metacognitive awareness, FLE and listening performance are as follows: 1) listening metacognitive awareness directly positively affects listening performance, in which ‘person knowledge’ plays a significant role; 2) FLE BCP Education & Psychology ERHSS 2022 Volume 6 (2022) 94 directly positively affects listening performance, and ‘FLE-Teacher’ plays a significant role; 3) Listening metacognitive awareness indirectly affects listening performance by affecting FLE, among which ‘problem solving’ and ‘planning-evaluation’ are the most effective. In order to verify the assumptions, muti-liner regression and simple-liner regression were adopted in this study. Muti-liner regression was conducted on the five types of listening metacognitive awareness, listening performance and FLE. The results are shown in Table 4.5 and Table 4.6. The regression equation was significant (P < 0.01), and there was no multicollinearity relationship between independent variables (VIF < 5). Table 4.5 Muti-liner regression of listening metacognitive awareness and listening performance (N = 276) Dependent variable Independent variables R2 F p B beta t LP 0.209 13.805 0.000 PS 0.030 0.769 0.197 2.185 PE 0.306 0.309 0.080 1.025 MT 0.462 0.183 0.051 0.737 DA 0.291 0.307 0.079 1.057 PK 0.000 1.071 0.350 6.079 Note. LP: listening performance, PS: ‘problem solving’, PE: ‘planning‐evaluation’, MT: ‘mental translation’, DA: ‘directed attention’, PK: ‘person knowledge’ Table 4.5 shows that five types of listening metacognitive awareness can explain 20.9% of the participants’ listening performance variation, which is higher than Vandergrift et al. (2006)’s result of 13%. Meanwhile, under the joint action of five types of listening metacognition, ‘person knowledge’ (β= 0.350, P < 0.01) was the most significant predictor of listening performance. Table 4.6 Muti-liner regression of listening metacognitive awareness and FLE (N = 268) Dependent variable Independent variables R2 F p B beta t FLE 0.405 35.588 0.000 PS 0.000 3.483 0.302 3.866 PE 0.000 4.381 0.387 5.682 MT 0.166 0.883 0.083 1.388 DA 0.233 0.888 0.078 1.195 PK 0.752 -0.142 -.016 -.316 Note. PS: ‘problem solving’, PE: ‘planning‐evaluation’, MT: ‘mental translation’, DA: ‘directed attention’, PK: ‘person knowledge’ As illustrated in Table 4.6, five types of listening metacognitive awareness predicted the variation of FLE by 40.5%. Meanwhile, when all five types of listening metacognitive consciousness were taken into consideration, only ‘problem solving’ (β = 0.302, P < 0.01) and ‘plan evaluation’ (β = 0.387, P < 0.01) had relatively significant impact, indicating that the latter two were effective predictive variables of FLE. The muti-liner regression analysis of the impact of FLE and MALQ score on listening performance is shown in Table 4.7, and the simple-liner regression analysis of the impact of MALQ score on listening performance is shown in Table 4.8. Table 4.7 Muti-liner regression of FLE, MALQ score and listening performance (N = 268) Dependent variable Independent variables R2 F p B beta t LP 0.182 0.182 0.000 FLE 0.679 0.009 0.026 0.414 MALQ Score 0.000 0.615 0.414 6.593 Note. LP: listening performance Table 4.8 Simple-liner regression of MALQ score, listening performance and FLE (N=268) Dependent variable Independent variable R2 F p B beta t LP .181 58.761 .000 BCP Education & Psychology ERHSS 2022 Volume 6 (2022) 95 MALQ Score .000 .633 .426 7.666 FLE .214 72.220 .000 MALQ Score .000 2.031 .463 8.498 Note. LP: listening performance Based on the results of regression analysis in Table 4.7 and Table 4.8, the relationship among the three variables was verified, as illustrated in Figure 4.1. Fig. 4.1 The relationship among listening metacognitive awareness, FLE and listening performance As indicated in Figure 4.1, the participants’ listening metacognitive awareness not only directly boosts their listening performance, but also indirectly promotes their listening performance by stimulates FLE. In other words, FLE has partial mediation effect between listening metacognitive awareness and listening performance. 5. Conclusion This study uses MALQ and FLE scale to collect the quantitative data of listening metacognitive awareness, FLE and listening performance of Chinese senior high school students who were in the primary stage of English learning. The data were analyzed by Pearson correlation analysis, independent samples t-test, simple-liner regression and muti-liner regression. The results showed that there was a significant correlation between listening metacognitive awareness and listening performance, in which ‘person knowledge’ was an effective variable to predict listening performance; FLE was significantly correlated with listening performance, which was mainly predicted by ‘FLE- Private’; FLE had partial mediation effect between listening metacognitive awareness and listening performance, that is, listening metacognitive awareness can also indirectly affect listening performance by affecting FLE. The pedagogical implications of the above conclusions are that for students in the primary stage of language learning, teachers should cultivate students’ listening metacognitive awareness in listening class, guide them to make plan for listening tasks, evaluate results, and adopt compensatory strategies appropriately. By this way, students are given the initiative and self-belief to organize, plan, monitor and adjust the listening process, so as to stimulate FLE. The limitation of this study is that the cross-sectional data of this study can only verify the positive predictive effect of listening metacognitive awareness and FLE on listening performance at that stage, while the effect of listening metacognitive awareness and FLE on listening performance is actually a dynamic system. Whether listening metacognitive awareness and FLE can improve learners’ listening performance in the real teaching situation needs to be further verified by future research. References [1] Brown A L & Palincsar A S. Inducing strategic learning from texts by means of informed, self-control training [J]. Center for the Study of Reading Technical Report; no. 262, 1982. [2] Coskun A. The effect of metacognitive strategy training on the listening performance of beginner students [J]. Novitas-royal, 2010, 4(1). [3] Dewaele J M & Alfawzan M. Does the effect of enjoyment outweigh that of anxiety in foreign language performance? [J]. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2018, 8(1): 21-45. BCP Education & Psychology ERHSS 2022 Volume 6 (2022) 96 [4] Dewaele J M & Li C. Emotions in second language acquisition: A critical review and research agenda [J]. Foreign Language World, 2020, 196(1): 34-49. [5] Dewaele J M & MacIntyre P D. The two faces of Janus? Anxiety and enjoyment in the foreign language classroom [J]. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching，2014，4( 2) : 237－274. [6] Dewaele J M & MacIntyre P D. Foreign language enjoyment and foreign language classroom anxiety: The right and left feet of the language learner [A]. In MacIntyre P D, Gregersen T & Mercer S (eds.). Positive Psychology in SLA [C]. Bristol: Multilingual Matters，2016. 215－236． [7] Flavell J H. Metacognitive aspects of problem solving [J]. The nature of intelligence, 1976. [8] Flavell J H. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry[J]. American psychologist, 1979, 34(10): 906. [9] Goh C C M, Hu G. Exploring the relationship between metacognitive awareness and listening performance with questionnaire data [J]. Language awareness, 2014, 23(3): 255-274. [10] Goh C, Taib Y. Metacognitive instruction in listening for young learners [J]. ELT journal, 2006, 60(3): 222-232. [11] Goh C. Metacognitive awareness and second language listeners [J]. ELT journal, 1997, 51(4): 361-369. [12] Jiang Y, Dewaele J M. How unique is the foreign language classroom enjoyment and anxiety of Chinese EFL learners? [J]. System, 2019, 82: 13-25. [13] Krashen S D. The input hypothesis: Issues and implications[M]. Addison-Wesley Longman Limited, 1985. [14] Li C, Jiang G, Dewaele J M. Understanding Chinese high school students’ foreign language enjoyment: validation of the Chinese version of the foreign language enjoyment scale [J]. System, 2018, 76: 183-196. [15] MacIntyre P D ＆ Gregersen T． Emotions that facilitate language learning: The positive-broadening power of the imagination [J]. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2012, 2(2): 193－213． [16] Oxford R L, Burry-Stock J A. Assessing the use of language learning strategies worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL)[J]. System, 1995, 23(1): 1-23. [17] Pekrun R. The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice [J]. Educational psychology review, 2006, 18(4): 315-341. [18] Teimouri Y. Differential roles of shame and guilt in L2 learning: How bad is bad? [J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2018, 102(4): 632-652. [19] Vandergrift L, Goh C C M, Mareschal C J, et al. The metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire: Development and validation [J]. Language learning, 2006, 56(3): 431-462. [20] Vandergrift L, Tafaghodtari M H. Teaching L2 learners how to listen does make a difference: An empirical study [J]. Language learning, 2010, 60(2): 470-497. [21] Wei H, Gao K, Wang W. Understanding the relationship between grit and foreign language performance among middle school students: The roles of foreign language enjoyment and classroom environment[J]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2019, 10: 1508. [22] Wenden A L. Metacognitive knowledge and language learning [J]. Applied linguistics, 1998, 19(4): 515- 537. [23] Wenden A L. What do second-language learners know about their language learning? A second look at retrospective accounts [J]. Applied linguistics, 1986, 7(2): 186-205. [24] Chang Pengyun, Hao Mei, Lawrence Jun Zhang. The influence of metacognitive strategies teaching method on the use of English listening strategies and listening style [J]. Foreign Languages, 2016(03):81- 88. [25] Deng Qiaoling. Study on the correlation between listening metacognitive awareness, listening anxiety and listening level of Chinese non-English major college students [J]. Foreign Language Teaching, 2015,36(05):59-64.DOI:10.16362/j.cnki .cn61-1023/h.2015.05.013. [26] Dong Lianqi, Liu Meihua. Exploration on the Effect Path of Foreign Language Pleasure on Foreign Language Performance: A Moderated Mediating Model [J]. Modern Foreign Languages, 2022, 45(02): 195-206. [27] Li Chengchen, Han Ye. Predictive effects of foreign language pleasure, anxiety and boredom on online learning outcomes [J]. Modern Foreign Languages, 2022, 45(02): 207-219. BCP Education & Psychology ERHSS 2022 Volume 6 (2022) 97 [28] Li Chengchen. Research on the relationship between emotional intelligence and English academic performance: the multiple mediating effects of pleasure, anxiety and burnout [J]. Foreign Languages, 2020(01):69-78. [29] Shen Yunhua, Zhang Jun. Research on the relationship between non-English major graduate students' metacognition and foreign language listening based on regression analysis [J]. Foreign Language Research, 2016, 33(03): 45-52+63+112. DOI: 10.13978/j.cnki.wyyj.2016.03.008. [30] Wei Xiaobao, Wu Lili, Chen Xun. A Study on the Relationship between Emotional Intelligence, Linguistic Thinking Mode and Second Language Communication Intention [J]. Foreign Languages, 2021(06):80-89. [31] Yu Cuihong, Zhang Yongzheng. Research on the development of Chinese college students' metacognitive awareness and English listening ability [J]. Journal of the PLA Institute of Foreign Languages, 2014, 37(06): 57-65. [32] Zhang Yongzheng, Yu Cuihong. A study on the metacognitive awareness of English learners with different listening levels based on MALQ [J]. Contemporary Foreign Language Research, 2015(01):32- 38+78. [33] Zhang Zhenghou, Feng Haiyun, Fu Youlong, Wang Hui. Analysis of the mediating effect of listening strategies between metacognitive awareness and English listening performance [J]. Foreign Languages, 2013(05):12-19+75. 1. Introduction 2. Literature Review 2.1 Listening metacognitive awareness 2.2 Foreign language enjoyment 3. Research design 3.1 Research questions 3.2 Participants 3.3 Instruments 3.4 Data collection and analysis 4. Results and discussion 4.1 The general level of listening metacognitive awareness and FLE 4.2 Correlations between MALQ Factors and listening performance 4.3 Correlation analysis between listening metacognitive awareness, FLE and listening performance 5. Conclusion References