Language learning strategies employed by second language learners in classroom contexts facilitate the learning process and make language learning more efficient, delightful, and enjoyable (Oxford et al., 2007). Because of this, a great deal of attention has been dedicated to language learning strategies, their definitions, and their subsets (e.g., Uslu et al., 2016; Feng et al., 2020; Pawlak, 2021a, to cite a few). However, research on grammar learning strategies (GLSs) is still in its infancy (Pawlak, 2012, 2020). Put simply, only a few investigations have been conducted into strategies of learning grammar. As put forward by Oxford and Amerstorfer (2018, p. 244), GLSs are “teachable, dynamic thoughts and behaviors that language learners consciously select and employ in specific contexts to improve their self-regulated, autonomous L2 grammar development for effective task performance and long-term efficiency”. To underline the importance of GLSs, De Keyser (2017) maintained that the efficient use of grammar strategies contributes to the growth of both explicit and implicit knowledge of grammar structures. In this regard, Pawlak (2018) also stated that those students who skillfully utilize various strategies to learn grammar are able to readily comprehend and remember the grammatical rules and structures. Additionally, Alsied et al. (2018) submitted that the efficient employment of GLSs will contribute to students’ higher grammatical competence and better linguistic performance. Similarly, Yeh (2021) also proposed that the use of GLSs will result in increased language achievement. Accordingly, identifying factors that may encourage L2 learners to employ GLSs throughout the learning process appears to be essential. To respond to this necessity, some researchers have delved into a variety of variables that may significantly contribute to the use of strategies in acquiring grammatical rules and structures (e.g., Rahimi et al., 2008; Abri et al., 2017; Zhou, 2017; Oxford and Amerstorfer, 2018; Zarrinabadi et al., 2021). Yet, the role of individual difference variables in the use of GLSs has remained elusive (Jabbari and Golkar, 2014; Khodadad and Kaur, 2018; Mistar and Zuhairi, 2020).

Individual differences generally refer to “dimensions of enduring personal characteristics that are assumed to apply to everybody and on which people differ by degree” (Dörnyei, 2006, p. 42). Individual differences in the educational domain pertain to a set of characteristics that mark pupils as unique and distinct learners (Winke, 2007; Hallett et al., 2012). As noted by Ellis (2004, p. 525), “personality, language aptitude, desire to learn a second language, willingness to communicate, motivation, learning strategies, and learning styles” are the main domains of individual differences among language learners. Among them, desire to learn a second language, motivation, and willingness to communicate were opted to be the main focus of this review study. As Dörnyei and Ryan (2015) mentioned, individual differences can drastically influence different aspects of language learning. Similarly, Griffiths and Soruç (2020) also submitted that individual differences are the significant predictors of students’ language achievement.

Due to the significance of individual differences in learning a new language (Dörnyei and Ryan, 2015; Griffiths and Soruç, 2020), a plethora of studies have been conducted to explore the educational consequences of language learners’ individual differences (e.g., Ardasheva and Tretter, 2013; Fillmore et al., 2014; Jaeggi et al., 2014; Grey et al., 2015; MacIntyre et al., 2016; Pawlak et al., 2016; Pawlak, 2017a,b). Notwithstanding, scant attention has been dedicated to the role of language learners’ individual differences in their use of GLSs (Jabbari and Golkar, 2014; Khodadad and Kaur, 2018; Mistar and Zuhairi, 2020). Moreover, to the best of the author’s knowledge, no review study has been done to offer various definitions of these variables (i.e., individual differences and grammar learning strategies) and illustrate their interactions in light of the theoretical and empirical evidence. This review study seeks to narrow this gap by illustrating the role of EFL learners’ individual differences in their use of GLSs.

Despite the importance of individual difference variables, such as motivation, academic desire, attitude, and willingness to communicate in grammar learning strategy use (Oxford and Amerstorfer, 2018; Pawlak, 2021b), limited attention has been paid to the role of these variables in EFL students’ employment of GLSs. That is, the influence of individual differences on the use of GLSs has remained marginal (Pawlak and Oxford, 2018). Put simply, a limited number of investigations have been performed in this regard (Jabbari and Golkar, 2014; Khodadad and Kaur, 2018; Mistar and Zuhairi, 2020). For instance, Jabbari and Golkar (2014) delved into the role of attitude as an individual difference variable in EFL students’ use of GLSs. To do so, the “Strategy Inventory for Language Learning” and the “Attitude/Motivation Test Battery” were administered to 100 EFL students. The results evinced that those EFL students who possess positive beliefs and attitudes toward English language grammar are better users of GLSs. In a same vein, Khodadad and Kaur (2018) examined the role of academic motivation as another instance of individual difference variables in grammar learning strategy use. To this end, two valid questionnaires were distributed among 240 Iranian EFL students. Relying on the participants’ answers, the researchers reported that grammar learning strategy use can be dramatically affected by students’ level of motivation. That is, students with higher levels of motivation are more likely to utilize GLSs. More recently, Mistar and Zuhairi (2020) studied several individual difference variables in relation to GLSs. They attempted to figure out the interrelationship among motivation, aptitude, personality, and grammar learning strategy use. To this aim, a set of questionnaires were administered to 280 EFL students. Inspecting the correlation of questionnaires, they found that only students’ motivation can significantly affect their use of grammar strategies.

So far, the existing definitions, characterizations, and classifications of individual differences and GLSs were outlined. With respect to the findings of previous studies, the role of EFL students’ individual differences in their use of GLSs was illustrated as well. In light of the empirical evidence, one can conclude that individual difference variables, such as motivation, academic desire, and willingness to communicate, may favorably affect both the quality and quantity of grammar learning strategy use. That is, EFL students with high levels of motivation, academic desire, and willingness to communicate are better users of GLSs (Oxford and Amerstorfer, 2018; Pawlak, 2021b).

This finding appears to be instructive for English language teachers and teacher trainers. To enhance EFL students’ use of GLSs, teachers are required to improve their pupils’ positive emotional traits, including motivation, desire to learn, and willingness to communicate. Given the undeniable role of students’ motivation, desire to learn, and willingness to communicate in their use of GLSs, teacher trainers are expected to educate their trainees how to develop these positive attributes in their students. As the review of previous studies revealed, only a few investigations (Jabbari and Golkar, 2014; Khodadad and Kaur, 2018; Mistar and Zuhairi, 2020) have been conducted to delve into the role of students’ individual differences in their use of grammar strategies. Thus, further investigation into this topic is strongly recommended.

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, and further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Shandong University Academic Ethics Committee. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and has approved it for publication.

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.