Index IntroductionThe four personality typesResearch methodologyConclusionsThere are numerous factors that influence the success of foreign language learning, including the personality type of students. Therefore, this study aimed to find out whether there is a significant correlation between students' personality type and their speaking performance of the fifth semester undergraduate EFL student at the English Education Study Program of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang. The researcher used correlational study as the research method of this study. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get Original Essay The population of this research consisted of 298 students of English Education study program at UIN Raden Fatah Palembang and 51 students were selected as the sample of this correlation research using purposive sampling technique. Furthermore, a quantitative method was employed using the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI) and the students' speaking score as an instrument. As a result, it was found that there was no significant correlation between students' personality type and speaking achievement, however, Pearson product moment analysis revealed that there was no significant correlation between students' personality type and speaking achievement. speak. Since the correlation of the coefficients is less than r-table. Subsequently, as there was no correlation between students' personality type and their speaking performance. Thus, regression analysis was not necessary. Introduction In the era of globalization, English is becoming an increasingly well-known language in every corner of the world. It attracts people to learn, write and speak more with it. However, this language is learned by people for its dual importance: communicating; and create greater employment opportunities (Crystal, 2003). First, the importance of English is that it is a means of communicating in an interconnected and interdependent world. Now, English has become an international language and is a kind of “must” language in many countries around the world. As a result, people realize the importance of this language for communication. Cook (2003) states that English is now taught as the primary foreign language in virtually every country and used for business, education, and access to information by a substantial portion of the world's population. Furthermore, English has become an important language for those who want to be better qualified to face the world. People with better English acquisition will have more opportunities to get a better career in their future, especially for those who speak well. That's why speaking becomes the first thing that appears in someone's performance. Furthermore, speaking is considered the most crucial and central aspect as it allows people to establish successful communication in that language, which is often the main goal of learning any foreign language (Pathan, Aldersi, & Alsout, 2014) . Communication, in fact, occurs where there is a discourse. Without speech people cannot communicate with each other directly. The importance of speaking skill, therefore, is enormous for learners of any language. Without speech, language is reduced to mere writing. Specifically, Mahdi (2014) states that psycholinguistics and socio-cultural factors are quite relevant to the educational field in the teaching and learning process. This research focuses on college students since English is notimportant only to be taught in high schools, but also at the university level where students are required to actively participate in the teaching and learning environment. Therefore, it can be deduced that it is very important to improve the fluency and accuracy of students' English communicative competence in relation to the recent English curricular objectives where oral skill teaching has become increasingly vital in the context of English as a language. foreign. These are some of the factors why the researcher conducted this research at this level because Comenius (as cited in Prasettiyo, 2015) highlights that the age range of the maturity level is between 18 and 24 years. In this age group, students acquired many intelligences from their formal and informal education. They were also past puberty. So, even if they had a negative aspect in both personality and speaking ability, these can still be changed (Okeefe, 2015). Lahaye (1994) emphasizes personality as the outward expression of oneself, which may or may not be the same thing as a person's character. , depending on how genuine that person is. It can be defined as an enduring and unique set of characteristics that can change in response to different situations (Schultz & Ellen, 2005). There are seven major group theories of personality that exist in the field of psychology such as psychodynamic, neo-Freudian, Learning (behaviorist), humanistic, biological, trait (dispositional), and cultural perspective (Boundless, 2016). Hans Eysenck was a personality theorist who focused on temperament: innate, genetically based personality differences. He believed that personality was largely governed by biology and viewed people as having two specific dimensions of personality: extroversion versus introversion and neuroticism versus stability. After collaborating with his wife and fellow personality theorist Sybil Eysenck, he added a third dimension to this model: psychoticism vs. socialization. The Four Personality Types Littaeur (1996) defines four personality temperaments as a proto-psychological theory that suggests there are four fundamental personalities. types, sanguine (optimistic and sociable), choleric (irascible or irritable), melancholic (analytical and calm) and phlegmatic (relaxed and peaceful). Most formulations provide for the possibility of mixtures of the types. The sanguine temperament is traditionally associated with air. People with this temperament tend to be lively, sociable, carefree, talkative, and pleasure-seeking. They can be affectionate and optimistic. They can easily make new friends, be imaginative and artistic, and often have many ideas. They can be fickle and changeable; thus optimistic personalities may have difficulty completing tasks to completion and be chronically late or forgetful. The choleric temperament is traditionally associated with fire. People with this temperament tend to be self-centered and extroverted. They may be excitable, impulsive and restless, with reserves of aggression, energy or passion, and seek to instill this in others. They tend to be task-oriented and focused on getting the job done efficiently; their motto is usually “do it now”. ”This temperament is traditionally associated with the earth element. People with this temperament may appear serious, introverted, cautious, or even suspicious. They may worry about the tragedy and cruelty of the world and are susceptible to depression and moodiness. They can be focused and conscientious. They often prefer to do things themselves, either to meet their own standards or because they are not inherently good at itsociable. Phlegmatic temperament is traditionally associated with water. People with this temperament can be reserved and reserved, thoughtful, reasonable, calm, patient, thoughtful and tolerant. They tend to have a rich inner life, seek a quiet and peaceful atmosphere and are content with themselves. An ambivert is moderately comfortable with groups and social interaction, but also appreciates time alone, away from crowds (Bhargava, Semwal, Juyal, Vyas & Varsney, 2015). This in a condition where someone belongs to all personality types. Because they naturally engage in a flexible pattern of speaking and listening, ambiverts are likely to express sufficient assertiveness and enthusiasm to persuade and close a sale, but they are more inclined to listen to customers' interests and less vulnerable to consequences. Appear too excited or overconfident. Research Methodology This study was undertaken in the English Education Study Program at UIN Raden Fatah Palembang. The population consisted of 103 fifth-semester students. The 51 students were involved in this study as a sample. The samples were chosen using a purposive sampling technique. This study used two types of instruments to collect data. The Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI), specialized for adult learners by Eysenck (2011), was used to obtain data from the students. The aim was to find out what personality type the students belong to. The questionnaire consisted of 57 dichotomous questions. The students' questionnaire was attached in Appendix 1. Then, the participant was also given the oral test to check the students' oral performance. The oral test recorded using a voice recorder and a video camera. The author used three trained raters to evaluate the outcome of the spoken record. Personality Type of Students The total active students in the fifth semester of English Education Study Program was 103 students, 51 students participated in this study. The 57 items of the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI) were used to investigate the participants' personality type. EPI was assessed according to a dichotomous scale (yes or no). When assessing students' personality, 24 items were calculated based on the answer key measuring how extroverted the participants are, 24 items were calculated to measure how neurotic they are. 9 items were not calculated because they used the “lying scale”. The purpose of constructing the scale was to know whether students responded honestly or not. If students responded, a score of 5 or higher on this “lying scale” means they are probably trying to make themselves look good and are not being completely honest in their answers. Based on the table above, there are two other personality types classified as an ambivert. I am sanguine-melancholic and choleric-melancholic. So, there are 23 students included as choleric personality type, 2 students are included as sanguine, 18 students are included as melancholic, 3 students are included as sanguine melancholic, and 5 students are included as choleric melancholic. The total sample size was 51 students. The minimum score obtained by students for personality types was 22 while the maximum score was 40. The average score obtained was 28.94 with the standard deviation was 4.007. The result of the speaking performance of the students The result obtained from the minimum score of speaking performance obtained by the students was 11 while the maximum score was 18. The average score obtained was 15.33 with the standard deviation was 2.132. Descriptive statistical analysis of speech for theparticipant is shown in Table 11. The highest score is 18.33 and the lowest score is 11.33. The mean speaking scores for the participants is 15, 25. The standard deviation is 2, 13. The speaking performance range is 7. This mean score indicates that the speaking performance level of the participants is Good. For each category, 16 students had excellent speaking results. 32 students performed well in speaking. 3 students had an average. no student spoke badly or very badly. Data are interpreted normally if p > 0.05. If p<0.05 it means that the data is not normal. Kolmogorov-Smirnov was used to seeing normality. The normality test results shown in Table 12 indicate that the data of each variable were all normal and appropriate for coefficient data analysis. 200 for personality and. 073 for speech resultsFor the linearity test, the linearity deviation was obtained. If the probability is greater than. 05, the two variables are linear. The result showed that the deviation from linearity between personality type and speaking achievement was to sum all data were linear for each correlation. Correlation between students' personality type and their speaking performance. Based on Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient, the result indicated that the correlation pattern between personality and speaking performance was negative. The correlation coefficient or r-obtained was lower than the r-table. therefore the probability level (p) of significance (2-tailed sig.) was. Meaning it was higher than. Therefore, no significant correlation was found between students' personality type and their speaking performance. This section presents interpretations of the study based on the outcome of the data analysis to address the objectives of this study; the correlation between students' personality type and their speaking performance, the contribution of students' personality to their speaking performance, the best predictor of personality type of speaking performance. To strengthen the value of this study interpretations are made based on the result of data analysis. According to the results, no significant correlation was found between personality type and speaking performance. Furthermore, since there is no correlation between students' personality type and speaking performance of fifth semester students of English Education Study Program of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang, the second and third research problems cannot be studied. Based on the Pearson Product Moment correlation result, it was found that there was no significant correlation between the personality and speaking achievement of EFL college students of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang (r-. 190). This means that personality has no relationship with speaking performance. Conclusions Three conclusions were drawn in this study based on the findings and interpretations. First, the results presented in chapter 4 showed that there is no correlation between the student's personality type and his speaking performance, furthermore, Pearson Product Moment analysis revealed that there is no significant correlation between the student's personality type and its results in speaking. The correlation number of the coefficients is. 217 which is less than r-table . So, it can be concluded that although the correlation between students' personality type and their speaking performance does not exist. Secondly, due to correlation does not exist between students' personality type and their speaking performance. The researcher could not continue this study until.