Volume 7, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2215-1931
  • E-ISSN: 2215-194X
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Visual feedback, in which learners visually analyze acoustic speech characteristics, has been shown to significantly improve pronunciation, but extant research has varied widely with respect to the target feature, length of the intervention, and type of intervention. This study presents a comparative analysis of three methods of visual feedback for L2 segmental pronunciation instruction. These methods, all focused on training voice onset time for English-speaking learners of Spanish, differed in duration of instruction (i.e., short and long) and the nature of each intervention (i.e., phonemes presented simultaneously or sequentially). Results show that while all forms of visual feedback significantly improve L2 Spanish pronunciation, evidenced by a reduction in voice onset time, the greatest improvement was found following both longer treatments and a sequential approach. Theoretical and pedagogical implications are discussed.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Akahane-Yamada, R., McDermott, E., Adachi, T., Kawahara, H., & Pruitt, J. S.
    (1998) Computer-based second language production training by using spectrographic representation and HMM-based speech recognition scores. InFifth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (pp.1–4). www.isca-speech.org/archive
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson-Hseih, J.
    (1992) Using electronic visual feedback to teach suprasegmentals. System, 20, 51–62. doi:  10.1016/0346‑251X(92)90007‑P
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(92)90007-P [Google Scholar]
  3. Auer, E. T., Bernstein, L. E., & Tucker, P. E.
    (2000) Is subjective word familiarity a meter of ambient language? A natural experiment on effects of perceptual experience. Memory & Cognition, 28(5), 789–797. doi:  10.3758/BF03198414
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198414 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
    (2014) lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1-7CRAN.R-project.org/package1⁄4lme4
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Barr, D., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H.
    (2013) Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278. doi:  10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  6. Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D.
    (2007) Nonnative and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. InM. Munro & O. S. Bohn (Eds.), Second language speech learning: The role of language experience in speech perception and production (pp.13–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.17.07bes
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.17.07bes [Google Scholar]
  7. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D.
    (2018) Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (version 6.0.42) [computer software]. Available fromwww.praat.org
  8. Bradlow, A. R., Pisoni, D. B., Akahane-Yamada, R., & Tohkura, Y. I.
    (1997) Training Japanese listeners to identify English/r/and/l: IV. Some effects of perceptual learning on speech production. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101(4), 2299–2310. doi:  10.1121/1.418276
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.418276 [Google Scholar]
  9. Carey, M.
    (2004) CALL Visual feedback for pronunciation of vowels: Kay Sona-Match. CALICO Journal, 21(3), 571–601. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24149798
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cho, T., & Ladefoged, P.
    (1999) Variation and universals in VOT: Evidence from 18 languages. Journal of Phonetics, 27, 207–229. doi:  10.1006/jpho.1999.0094
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1999.0094 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chun, D.
    (1989) Teaching tone with microcomputers. CALICO Journal, 7(1), 21–47. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24147465
    [Google Scholar]
  12. (1998) Signal analysis software for teaching discourse intonation. Language Learning & Technology, 2(1), 61–77. llt.msu.edu/vol2num1/article4/index.html
    [Google Scholar]
  13. (2002) Discourse intonation in L2: From theory and research to practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.1
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.1 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2007) Come ride the wave: But where is it taking us?CALICO Journal, 24(2), 239–252. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24147910
    [Google Scholar]
  15. de Bot, K.
    (1980) Evaluation of intonation acquisition: A comparison of methods. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 7, 81–92.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. (1983) Visual feedback of intonation: Effectiveness and induced practice behavior. Language and Speech, 26, 331–350. doi:  10.1177/002383098302600402
    https://doi.org/10.1177/002383098302600402 [Google Scholar]
  17. de Jong, K. J., Hao, Y., & Park, H.
    (2009) Evidence for featural units in the acquisition of speech production skills: Linguistic structure in foreign accent. Journal of Phonetics, 37, 357–373. doi:  10.1016/j.wocn.2009.06.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2009.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  18. Derwing, T., & Munro, M.
    (2005) Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: a research-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 379–397. doi:  10.2307/3588486
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588486 [Google Scholar]
  19. Derwing, T. M. & Munro, M.
    (2015) Pronunciation fundamentals: Evidence-based perspectives for L2 teaching and research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.42
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.42 [Google Scholar]
  20. Derwing, T., Munro, M., & Wiebe, G.
    (1998) Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation instruction. Language Learning, 48(3), 393–410. doi:  10.1111/0023‑8333.00047
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00047 [Google Scholar]
  21. Fischer, L. B.
    (1986) The use of audio/visual aids in the teaching and learning of French. Pine Brook, NJ: Kay Elemetrics Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Flege, J. E.
    (1995) Second language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. InW. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp.233–276). Baltimore: York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Flege, J. E., & Wang, C.
    (1989) Native-language phonotactic constraints affect how well Chinese subjects perceive the word-final /t/–/d/ contrast. Journal of Phonetics, 17, 299–315. doi:  10.1016/S0095‑4470(19)30446‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30446-2 [Google Scholar]
  24. Garcia, C., Kolat, M. & Morgan, T.
    (2018) Self-correction of second language pronunciation via online, real-time, visual feedback. InJ. Levis (Ed.), Proceedings of the 9th Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference (pp.54–65). Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Hardison, D.
    (2004) Generalization of computer assisted prosody training: Quantitative and qualitative findings. Language Learning and Technology, 8(1), 34–52.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Kartushina, N., Hervais-Adelman, A., Frauenfelder, U. H., & Golestani, N.
    (2015) The effect of phonetic production training with visual feedback on the perception and production of foreign speech sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 138, 817–832. doi:  10.1121/1.4926561
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4926561 [Google Scholar]
  27. Lambacher, S.
    (1999) A CALL tool for improving second language acquisition of English consonants by Japanese learners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12(2), 137–156. doi:  10.1076/call.
    https://doi.org/10.1076/call. [Google Scholar]
  28. Lee, J., Jang, J., & Plonsky, L.
    (2015) The effectiveness of second language pronunciation instruction: A meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 345–366. doi:  10.1093/applin/amu040
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu040 [Google Scholar]
  29. Lee, J. F., & VanPatten, B.
    (1995) Making communicative language teaching happen. Volume 1: Directions for language learning and teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Léon, P., & Martin, P.
    (1972) Applied linguistics and the teaching of intonation. The Modern Language Journal, 56(3), 139–144. doi:  10.1111/j.1540‑4781.1972.tb05032.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1972.tb05032.x [Google Scholar]
  31. Levis, J.
    (2005) Changing contexts and shifting paradigms in pronunciation teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3), 369–377. doi:  10.2307/3588485
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588485 [Google Scholar]
  32. (2007) Computer technology in teaching and researching pronunciation. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics27, 184–202. doi:  10.1017/S0267190508070098
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190508070098 [Google Scholar]
  33. Levis, J., & Pickering, L.
    (2004) Teaching intonation in discourse using speech visualization technology. System, 32, 505–524. doi:  10.1016/j.system.2004.09.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.09.009 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S.
    (1964) A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word, 20(3), 384–422. doi:  10.1080/00437956.1964.11659830
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1964.11659830 [Google Scholar]
  35. Lord, G.
    (2005) (How) can we teach foreign language pronunciation? On the effects of a Spanish phonetics course. Hispania, 88(3), 557–567. doi:  10.2307/20063159
    https://doi.org/10.2307/20063159 [Google Scholar]
  36. McBride, K.
    (2015) Which features of Spanish learner’s pronunciation most impact listener evaluations?Hispania98(1), 14–30. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24368849
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Moholt, G.
    (1988) Computer assisted instruction in pronunciation for Chinese speakers of American English. TESOL Quarterly22(1), 91–111. doi:  10.2307/3587063
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587063 [Google Scholar]
  38. Motohashi-Saigo, M., & Hardison, D.
    (2009) Acquisition of L2 Japanese geminates training with waveform displays. Language Learning & Technology, 13(2), 29–47. llt.msu.edu/vol13num2/motohashisaigohardison.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Munro, M. J.
    (2016) Pronunciation learning and teaching: What can phonetics research tell us. In the Proceedings of the International Symposium on Applied Phonetics (p.26–29). doi:  10.21437/ISAPh.2016‑5
    https://doi.org/10.21437/ISAPh.2016-5 [Google Scholar]
  40. Munro, M.J., & Derwing, T.
    (1995) Foreign accent, comprehensibility and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 45, 73–97. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1995.tb00963.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00963.x [Google Scholar]
  41. Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L.
    (2000) Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning50(3), 417–528. 10.1111/0023‑8333.00136
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00136 [Google Scholar]
  42. Okuno, T.
    (2013) Acquisition of L2 vowel duration in Japanese by native English speakers. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Offerman, H. M.
    (2020) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Effects of pronunciation instruction on L2 learner production and perception in Spanish: A comparative analysis. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Offerman, H. M., & Olson, D. J.
    (2016) Visual feedback and second language segmental production: The generalizability of pronunciation gains. System, 59, 45–60. doi:  10.1016/j.system.2016.03.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.03.003 [Google Scholar]
  45. Olson, D. J.
    (2014a) Phonetics and technology in the classroom: A practical approach to using speech analysis software in second-language pronunciation instruction. Hispania, 97(1), 47–68. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24368745. 10.1353/hpn.2014.0030
    https://doi.org/10.1353/hpn.2014.0030 [Google Scholar]
  46. (2014b) Benefits of visual feedback on segmental production in the L2 classroom. Language Learning and Technology, 18(3), 173–192. llt.msu.edu/issues/october2014/olson.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  47. (2019) Feature acquisition in second language phonetic development: Evidence from phonetic training. Language Learning, 69(2), 366–404. doi:  10.1111/lang.12336
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12336 [Google Scholar]
  48. (Under review). Considering the scope of phonetic features in second language acquisition.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Plonsky, L., & Brown, D.
    (2015) Domain definition and search techniques in meta-analyses of L2 research (Or why 18 meta-analyses of feedback have different results). Second Language Research, 31(2), 267–278. 10.1177/0267658314536436
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658314536436 [Google Scholar]
  50. Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F.
    (2014) How big is “big” Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. doi:  10.1111/lang.12079
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079 [Google Scholar]
  51. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2013) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. www.R-project.org/
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Revelle, W.
    (2018) psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research. R package version 1.8.4. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Ruellot, V.
    (2011) Computer-assisted pronunciation learning of French /u/ and /y/ at the intermediate level. InJ. Levis & K. LeVelle (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference (pp.199–213). Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Saito, K.
    (2007) The influence of explicit phonetic instruction on pronunciation teaching in EFL settings: The case of English vowels and Japanese learners of English. The Linguistics Journal, 3(3), 16–40.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Schmidt, R.
    (1990) The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–159. doi:  10.1093/applin/11.2.129
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129 [Google Scholar]
  56. (1995) Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. InR. W. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp.1–63). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Spaai, G. W., & Hermes, D. J.
    (1993) A visual display for the teaching of intonation. Calico Journal10(3), 19–30. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24147786
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Sturm, J., Miyamoto, M., & Suzuki, N.
    (2019) Pronunciation in the L2 French classroom: Student and teacher attitudes. The French Review, 92(3), 60–78. 10.1353/tfr.2019.0182
    https://doi.org/10.1353/tfr.2019.0182 [Google Scholar]
  59. Thomson, R. I., & Derwing, T. M.
    (2015) The effectiveness of L2 pronunciation instruction: A narrative review. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 326–344. doi:  10.1093/applin/amu076
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu076 [Google Scholar]
  60. Tyler, M.
    (2019) PAM-L2 and phonological category acquisition in the foreign language classroom. InA. M. Nyvad, M. Hejná, A. Højen, A. B. Jespersen, & M. Hjortshøj Sørensen (Eds.) A sound approach to language matters – In honor of Ocke-Schwen Bohn (pp.607–630). Department of English, School of Communication & Culture, Aarhus University.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): classroom; English; pronunciation; Spanish; technology; visual feedback; voice onset time
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error