1887
Volume 2, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2542-3835
  • E-ISSN: 2542-3843
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Despite numerous positive findings of explicit instruction, this topic continues to engage scholars worldwide. One issue that may be crucial for the effectiveness of explicit instruction is the interaction between cognitive individual differences (language aptitude and working memory) and types of instruction. In this experiment, 128 learners of Spanish were randomly assigned to four experimental treatments and completed comprehension-based practice for interpreting object-verb and ser/estar sentences in Spanish. Results revealed that the various combinations of rules and practice posed differential task demands on the learners and consequently drew on language aptitude and working memory to a different extent. We argue that not only are rules and practice both necessary, but that their suitable integration ameliorates task demands, reducing the burden on the learner, and accordingly mitigates the role of participants’ individual differences, thus making a substantial difference for the learning of second language grammar.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.19003.kac
2019-10-08
2019-10-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ackerman, P. L.
    (1990) A correlational analysis of skill specificity: Learning, abilities, and individual differences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16(5), 883.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. (1988) Determinants of individual differences during skill acquisition: Cognitive abilities and information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117(3), 288. 10.1037/0096‑3445.117.3.288
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.117.3.288 [Google Scholar]
  3. Anderson, J. R.
    (1993) Rules of the mind. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. (1982) Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychological Review, 89(4), 369. 10.1037/0033‑295X.89.4.369
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.89.4.369 [Google Scholar]
  5. Anderson, J. R., & Fincham, J. M.
    (1994) Acquisition of procedural skills from examples. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(6), 1322.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Anderson, J. R., Fincham, J. M., & Douglass, S.
    (1997) The role of examples and rules in the acquisition of a cognitive skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23(4), 932.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Baddeley, A. D.
    (1986) Working memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Baddeley, A.
    (2010) Working memory. Current Biology, 20(4), R136–R140. 10.1016/j.cub.2009.12.014
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2009.12.014 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bates, E., MacWhinney, B., Caselli, C., Devescovi, A., Natale, F., & Venza, V.
    (1984) A cross-linguistic study of the development of sentence interpretation strategies. Child Development, 55, 341–354. 10.2307/1129947
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1129947 [Google Scholar]
  10. Benati, A.
    (2004) The effects of processing instruction, traditional instruction and meaning – output instruction on the acquisition of the English past simple tense. Language Teaching Research, 9(1), 67–93. 10.1191/1362168805lr154oa
    https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168805lr154oa [Google Scholar]
  11. Bever, T. G.
    (1970) The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. InJ. R. Hayes, (Ed.) Cognition and the development of language (pp.279–362). New York, NY: Wiley.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Biedroń, A., & Pawlak, M.
    (2016) The interface between research on individual difference variables and teaching practice: The case of cognitive factors and personality. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(3), 395–422. 10.14746/sllt.2016.6.3.3
    https://doi.org/10.14746/sllt.2016.6.3.3 [Google Scholar]
  13. Brooks, P. J., Kempe, V., & Sionov, A.
    (2006) The role of learner and input variables in learning inflectional morphology. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(2), 185–209. 10.1017/S0142716406060243
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406060243 [Google Scholar]
  14. Carroll, J. B.
    (1981) Language aptitude measures in streaming, matching students with methods, and diagnosis of learning problems. InK. C. Diller (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude (pp.83–118). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Daily, L. Z., Lovett, M. C., & Reder, L. M.
    (1998) Cross-task prediction of working memory performance: Working memory capacity as source activation. InSixth Annual ACT-R Workshop, Fairfax, VA.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. De Graaff, R.
    (1997) The eXperanto experiment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(02), 249–276. 10.1017/S0272263197002064
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197002064 [Google Scholar]
  17. De Jong, N., & Perfetti, C. A.
    (2011) Fluency training in the ESL classroom: An experimental study of fluency development and proceduralization. Language Learning, 61(2), 533–568. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00620.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00620.x [Google Scholar]
  18. DeKeyser, R. M.
    (1997) Beyond explicit rule learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(02), 195–221. 10.1017/S0272263197002040
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197002040 [Google Scholar]
  19. (1998) Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practic- ing second language grammar. InC. D. J. Williams (Ed.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.42–63). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. (2007) (Ed.). Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511667275
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667275 [Google Scholar]
  21. (2012) Interactions between individual differences, treatments, and structures in SLA. Language Learning, 62(s2), 189–200. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2012.00712.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00712.x [Google Scholar]
  22. DeKeyser, R.
    (2013) Age effects in second language learning: Stepping stones toward better understanding. Language Learning, 63(Suppl. 1), 52–67. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2012.00737.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00737.x [Google Scholar]
  23. DeKeyser, R. M.
    (2015) Skill Acquisition Theory. InB. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp.94–113). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. DeKeyser, R. M., & Koeth, J.
    (2011) Cognitive aptitudes for second language learning. InE. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol.2, pp.395–406). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. DeKeyser, R. M., & Criado-Sánchez, R.
    (2012) Automatization, skill acquisition, and practice in second language acquisition. InC. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp.323–331). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0067
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0067 [Google Scholar]
  26. Doughty, C., Campbell, S., Bunting, M., Bowles, A., & Haarmann, H.
    (2007) The development of the high-level language aptitude battery. Center for Advanced Study of Language Technical Report (TTO 2105 M. 4). College Park, MD: University of Maryland.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Engle, R. W.
    (2002) Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current directions in Psychological Science, 11(1), 19–23. 10.1111/1467‑8721.00160
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00160 [Google Scholar]
  28. Erlam, R.
    (2003) The effects of deductive and inductive instruction on the acquisition of direct object pronouns in French as a second language. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2), 242–260. 10.1111/1540‑4781.00188
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00188 [Google Scholar]
  29. (2005) Language aptitude and its relationship to instructional effectiveness in second language acquisition. Language Teaching Research, 9(2), 147–171. 10.1191/1362168805lr161oa
    https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168805lr161oa [Google Scholar]
  30. Farley, A.
    (2004a) The relative effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction. InB. VanPatten (Eds.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp.143–168). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. (2004b) Processing instruction and the Spanish subjunctive: Is explicit information needed?InB. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp.227–239). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Fernández, C.
    (2008) Reexamining the role of explicit information in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 277–305. 10.1017/S0272263108080467
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263108080467 [Google Scholar]
  33. Fitts, P. M.
    (1964) Perceptual-motor skill learning. Categories of Human Learning, 47, 381–391.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. French, L. M. & O’Brien, I.
    (2008) Phonological memory and children’s second language grammar learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29, 463–87. 10.1017/S0142716408080211
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716408080211 [Google Scholar]
  35. Gass, S. M.
    (1989) Language universals and second-language acquisition. Language Learning, 39(4), 497–534. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1989.tb00901.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1989.tb00901.x [Google Scholar]
  36. Goo, J.
    (2012) Corrective feedback and working memory capacity in interaction-driven L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 445–474. 10.1017/S0272263112000149
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000149 [Google Scholar]
  37. Goo, J., Granena, G., Yilmaz, Y., & Novella, M.
    (2015) Implicit and explicit instruction in L2 learning: Norris & Ortega (2000) revisited and updated. InP. Rebuschat (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.48.18goo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.48.18goo [Google Scholar]
  38. Granena, G.
    (2013) Reexamining the robustness of aptitude in second language acquisition. InG. Granena & M. H. Long (Eds.). Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.35.07gra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.35.07gra [Google Scholar]
  39. Harrington, M., & Sawyer, M.
    (1992) L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14(1), 25–38. 10.1017/S0272263100010457
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100010457 [Google Scholar]
  40. Henry, N., Culman, H., & Vanpatten, B.
    (2009) More on the effects of explicit information in instructed SLA . A partial replication and a response to Fernández (2008). Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 559–575. 10.1017/S0272263109990027
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990027 [Google Scholar]
  41. Huitema, B.
    (2011) The analysis of covariance and alternatives. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781118067475
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118067475 [Google Scholar]
  42. Juffs, A.
    (2004) Representation, processing and working memory in a second language. Transactions of the Philological Society, 102, 199–226. 10.1111/j.0079‑1636.2004.00135.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0079-1636.2004.00135.x [Google Scholar]
  43. Juffs, A., & Harrington, M. W.
    (2011) Aspects of working memory in L2 Learning. Language Teaching: Reviews and Studies, 42(2), 137–166. 10.1017/S0261444810000509
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444810000509 [Google Scholar]
  44. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A.
    (1992) A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122–149. 10.1037/0033‑295X.99.1.122
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.122 [Google Scholar]
  45. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E.
    (2006) Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1 [Google Scholar]
  46. Kormos, J., & Sáfár, A.
    (2008) Phonological short-term memory, working memory and foreign language performance in intensive language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(2), 261–271. 10.1017/S1366728908003416
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728908003416 [Google Scholar]
  47. Lado, B., Bowden, H. W., Stafford, C. A., & Sanz, C.
    (2014) A fine-grained analysis of the effects of negative evidence with and without metalinguistic information in language development. Language Teaching Research, 18(3), 320–344. 10.1177/1362168813510382
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813510382 [Google Scholar]
  48. Li, S.
    (2013) The interactions between the effects of implicit and explicit feedback and individual differences in language analytic ability and working memory. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 634–654. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2013.12030.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12030.x [Google Scholar]
  49. Linck, J. A., Hughes, M. M., Campbell, S. G., Silbert, N. H., Tare, M., Jackson, S. R., … Doughty, C. J.
    (2013) Hi-LAB: A new measure of aptitude for high-level language proficiency. Language Learning, 63(3), 530–566. 10.1111/lang.12011
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12011 [Google Scholar]
  50. Linck, J. A., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. T., & Bunting, M. F.
    (2014) Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 21(4), 861–883. 10.3758/s13423‑013‑0565‑2
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0565-2 [Google Scholar]
  51. Lovett, M. C., Reder, L. M., & Lebiere, C.
    (1997) Modeling individual differences in a digit working memory task. InProceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp.460–465).
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Lyster, R.
    (1994) The effect of functional-analytic teaching on aspects of French immersion students’ sociolinguistic competence. Applied Linguistics, 15(3), 263–287. 10.1093/applin/15.3.263
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/15.3.263 [Google Scholar]
  53. (2004) Research on form-focused instruction in immersion classrooms: Implications for theory and practice. Journal of French Language Studies, 14, 321–341. 10.1017/S0959269504001826
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959269504001826 [Google Scholar]
  54. (2007) Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.18
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.18 [Google Scholar]
  55. Lyster, R., & Sato, M.
    (2013) Skill acquisition theory and the role of practice in L2 development. InM. García Mayo, J. Gutierrez-Mangado & M. Martínez Adrián (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on second language acquisition. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/aals.9.07ch4
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.9.07ch4 [Google Scholar]
  56. Mackey, A., Philp, J., Egi, T., Fujii, A. & Tatsumi, T.
    (2002) Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback, and L2 development. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.181–209). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.2.12mac
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.12mac [Google Scholar]
  57. Mackey, A., Adams, R., Stafford, C., & Winke, P.
    (2010) Exploring the relationship between modified output and working memory capacity. Language Learning, 60(3), 501–533. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00565.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00565.x [Google Scholar]
  58. MacWhinney, B.
    (2001) The competition model: The input, the context, and the brain. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.69–90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.005
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.005 [Google Scholar]
  59. Martin, K. I., & Ellis, N. C.
    (2012) The roles of phonological STM and working memory in L2 grammar and vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(3), 379–413. 10.1017/S0272263112000125
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000125 [Google Scholar]
  60. McLaughlin, B.
    (1990) Restructuring. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 113–128. 10.1093/applin/11.2.113
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.113 [Google Scholar]
  61. Morgan-Short, K., Faretta-Stutenberg, M., Brill-Schuetz, K. A., Carpenter, H., & Wong, P.
    (2014) Declarative and procedural memory as individual differences in second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(1), 56–72. 10.1017/S1366728912000715
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728912000715 [Google Scholar]
  62. Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L.
    (2000) Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417–528. 10.1111/0023‑8333.00136
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00136 [Google Scholar]
  63. O’Brien, I., Segalowitz, N., Collentine, J., & Freed, B.
    (2006) Phonological memory and lexical, narrative, and grammatical skills in second language oral production by adult learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 377–402. 10.1017/S0142716406060322
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406060322 [Google Scholar]
  64. Papagno, C., Valentine, T., & Baddeley, A. D.
    (1991) Phonological short-term memory and foreign-language vocabulary learning. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 331–347. 10.1016/0749‑596X(91)90040‑Q
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90040-Q [Google Scholar]
  65. Perrachione, T. K., Lee, J., Ha, L. Y., & Wong, P. C.
    (2011) Learning a novel phonological contrast depends on interactions between individual differences and training paradigm design. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(1), 461–472. 10.1121/1.3593366
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3593366 [Google Scholar]
  66. Presson, N., MacWhinney, B., & Tokowicz, N.
    (2014) Learning grammatical gender: The use of rules by novice learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35(4), 709–737. 10.1017/S0142716412000550
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716412000550 [Google Scholar]
  67. Prieto Botana, G.
    (2013) The role of task-essentialness and explicit information in processing instruction (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Maryland, College Park.
  68. Ranta, L.
    (2002) The role of learners’ language analytic ability in the communicative classroom. Individual differences and instructed language learning, 159–180. 10.1075/lllt.2.11ran
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.11ran [Google Scholar]
  69. Ranta, L., & Lyster, R.
    (2007) A cognitive approach to improving immersion students’ oral production abilities: The awareness, practice, and feedback sequence. InR. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practicing in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511667275.009
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667275.009 [Google Scholar]
  70. Rehling, J., Demiral, B., Lebiere, C., Lovett, M., & Reder, L. M.
    (2003) Modeling individual difference factors in a complex task environment. InF. Detje, D. Doerner, & H. Schaub (Eds.), InProceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Cognitive Modeling (pp.287–288). Bamberg: Universitats-Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Révész, A.
    (2012) Working memory and the observed effectiveness of recasts on different L2 outcome measures. Language Learning, 62(1), 93–132. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2011.00690.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00690.x [Google Scholar]
  72. Robinson, P.
    (1996) Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(1), 27–67. 10.1017/S0272263100014674
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100014674 [Google Scholar]
  73. (1997) Generalizability and automaticity of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(2), 223–247. 10.1017/S0272263197002052
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197002052 [Google Scholar]
  74. (2002) Effects of individual differences in intelligence, aptitude and working memory on adult incidental SLA. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.211–266). 10.1075/lllt.2.13rob
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.13rob [Google Scholar]
  75. (2005) Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 46–73. 10.1017/S0267190505000036
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190505000036 [Google Scholar]
  76. (2007) Aptitudes, abilities, contexts, and practice. Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology, 256–286. 10.1017/CBO9780511667275.015
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667275.015 [Google Scholar]
  77. Sallas, B., Mathews, R. C., Lane, S. M., & Sun, R.
    (2007) Developing rich and quickly accessed knowledge of an artificial grammar. Memory & Cognition, 35(8), 2118–2133. 10.3758/BF03192943
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192943 [Google Scholar]
  78. Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K.
    (2004) Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer-assisted study. Language Learning, 54, 35–78. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2004.00248.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00248.x [Google Scholar]
  79. Sanz, C., Lin, H. J., Lado, B., Stafford, C. A., & Bowden, H. W.
    (2014) One size fits all? Learning conditions and working memory capacity in ab initio language development. Applied Linguistics, 37(5), 669–692. 10.1093/applin/amu058
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu058 [Google Scholar]
  80. Serafini, E. J., & Sanz, C.
    (2016) Evidence for the decreasing impact of cognitive ability on second language development as proficiency increases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 607–646. 10.1017/S0272263115000327
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000327 [Google Scholar]
  81. Sheen, Y.
    (2007) The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 255–283. 10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2007.tb00059.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x [Google Scholar]
  82. Skehan, P.
    (1998) A cognitive approach to learning language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  83. (2012) Language aptitude. InS. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.). The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp.381–395). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. (2015a) Working memory and second language performance: A commentary. InZ. Wen, M. Borges Mota, & A. McNeill (Eds.), Working memory in second language acquisition and processing (pp.189–202). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783093595‑015
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783093595-015 [Google Scholar]
  85. (2015b) Foreign language aptitude and its relationship with grammar: A critical overview. Applied Linguistics, 36, 367–384. doi:  10.1093/applin/amu072
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu072 [Google Scholar]
  86. Snow, R. E.
    (1989) Aptitude-treatment interaction as a framework for research on individual differences in learning. InP. L. Ackerman, R. J. Sternberg, & R. Glaser (Eds.), A series of books in psychology. Learning and individual differences: Advances in theory and research (pp.13–59). New York, NY: W. H. Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Spada, N., & Tomita, Y.
    (2010) Interactions between type of instruction and yype of language reature: A meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 263–308. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00562.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00562.x [Google Scholar]
  88. Stafford, C. A., Bowden, H. W., & Sanz, C.
    (2012) Optimizing language instruction: Matters of explicitness, practice, and cue learning. Language Learning, 62(3), 741–768. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2011.00648.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00648.x [Google Scholar]
  89. Suzuki, Y., & DeKeyser, R.
    (2017) The interface of explicit and implicit knowledge in a second language: Insights from individual differences in cognitive aptitude. Language Learning, 67, 747–790. doi:  10.1111/lang.12241
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12241 [Google Scholar]
  90. Taatgen, N. A.
    (2001) A model of individual differences in learning air traffic control. InE. M. Altmann, A. Cleeremans, C. D. Schunn, & W. D. Gray (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2001 fourth International Conference on Cognitive Modeling (pp.211–216). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Taatgen, N. A., & Wallach, D.
    (2002) Whether skill acquisition is rule or instance based is determined by the structure of the task. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 2(2), 163–204.
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Tagarelli, K. M., & Borges, M.
    (2015) Working memory, learning conditions and the acquisition of L2 syntax. InZ. Wen, M. Borges Mota, & A. McNeill (Eds.), Working memory in second language acquisition and processing: Theory, research and commentary (pp.224–247). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783093595‑017
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783093595-017 [Google Scholar]
  93. VanPatten, B.
    (1987) Classroom learners’ acquisition of ser and estar: Accounting for developmental patterns. InB. VanPatten, T. R. Dvorak, & J. F. Lee (Eds.), Foreign language learning: A research perspective (pp.61–75). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  94. VanPatten, B., & Oikkenon, S.
    (1996) Explanation vs. structured input in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 495–510. 10.1017/S0272263100015394
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100015394 [Google Scholar]
  95. VanLehn, K.
    (1996) Cognitive skill acquisition. InJ. Spence, J. Darly, & D. J. Foss (Eds.), Annual review of psychology (Vol.47, pp.513–539). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Vatz, K., Tare, M., Jackson, S. & Doughty, C.
    (2013) Aptitude-treatment interaction studies in second language acquisition: Findings and methodology. InG. Granena & M. H. Long (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment (pp.273–92). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.35.11vat
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.35.11vat [Google Scholar]
  97. Wesche, M.
    (1981) Language aptitude measures in streaming, matching students with methods, and diagnosis of learning problems. InK. Diller (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude (pp.119–154). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Williams, J. N.
    (1999) Memory, attention, and inductive learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(01), 1–48. 10.1017/S0272263199001011
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199001011 [Google Scholar]
  99. Wong, W.
    (2004) Processing instruction in French: The roles of explicit information and structured input. InB. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp.187–205). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.19003.kac
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.19003.kac
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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