Abstract
This article reviews the proposition that achievement in a second language is related to attitudinal/motivational characteristics of the students. It uses as its starting point articles by Oller and Perkins, and demonstrates that their generalizations that such relationships are weak, and that they are due to the spurious effects of verbal intelligence and language proficiency are not founded in fact. Statistical, contextual, and conceptual issues relevant to their criticisms of this research area are reviewed, as are much more parsimonious interpretations of so‐called “strange” findings. It is recommended that rather than argue over hypothetical relationships, we direct our research attention to unravelling the mysteries of second language acquisition, to the benefit of students and teachers alike.