1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of Second Language Studies
  4. Volume 2, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 2, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2542-3835
  • E-ISSN: 2542-3843
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Working memory, which accounts for the ability to process information in the face of interference, is critical to second language acquisition (SLA) and use. The interaction of working memory capacity (WMC) with specific pedagogical interventions is a logical place for empirical SLA research, both to examine the cognitive processes underpinning second language performance and to identify instructional treatments that may serve learners differently based on their WMC. This study considers WMC along with two different types of pre-task planning time (guided and unguided) as predictors of the attempted accuracy and fluency of learners’ discourse. Seventy-two intermediate ESL students from seven classes at a community college participated by completing two different working memory span tasks, as well as two different “There-and-Then” oral story-telling tasks. The treatment condition of the story-telling tasks was manipulated so that learners’ performance could be considered in terms of provision of pre-task planning (+/− planning), type of planning (guided vs. unguided), and order of planning (planning first or planning second). Task order had a clear effect on learners’ production, regardless of the provision of planning time. Guided planning time promoted a focus on attempted accuracy and unguided planning time fostered fluency. Finally, this study indicates that task conditions can affect high- and low-WMC learners in different ways: the former are more likely to comply with complex story-telling instructions, requiring them to focus on grammatical form at the expense of fluency, whereas the latter are less likely to comply with the same instructions.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.19004.bro
2019-10-08
2024-10-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jsls.19004.bro
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Atkins, S. M., Harbison, J. I., Bunting, M. F., Teubner-Rhodes, S., & Dougherty, M. R.
    (2009) Measuring working memory with automated block span and automated letter-number sequencing. Poster presented at the50th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Boston, MA. 10.1037/e520562012‑435
     https://doi.org/10.1037/e520562012-435 [Google Scholar]
  2. Baddeley, A. & Hitch, G.
    (1974) Working memory. InG. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol.8, pp.47–90). New York, NY: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Conway, A. R. A., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. W.
    (2005) Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(5), 769–786. 10.3758/BF03196772
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196772 [Google Scholar]
  4. Cowan, N.
    (1999) An embedded-processes model of working memory. InA. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp.62–101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139174909.006
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174909.006 [Google Scholar]
  5. Crookes, G.
    (1989) Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 367–383. 10.1017/S0272263100008391
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100008391 [Google Scholar]
  6. Daneman, M. & Carpenter, P.
    (1980) Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466. 10.1016/S0022‑5371(80)90312‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6 [Google Scholar]
  7. Daneman, M. & Green, I.
    (1986) Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(1), 1–18. 10.1016/0749‑596X(86)90018‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(86)90018-5 [Google Scholar]
  8. DeKeyser, R. M.
    (2009) Cognitive-psychological processes in second language learning. In. M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp.119–138). Malden, MA: Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444315783.ch8
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315783.ch8 [Google Scholar]
  9. 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). London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Ellis, R.
    (2009) The differential effects of three types of task planning on the fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 474–509. 10.1093/applin/amp042
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp042 [Google Scholar]
  11. (2012) Language teaching research and language pedagogy. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781118271643
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118271643 [Google Scholar]
  12. Engle, R. W., Kane, M. J., & Tuholski, S. W.
    (1999) Individual differences in WMC and what they tell us about controlled attention, general fluid intelligence, and functions of the prefrontal cortex. InA. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp.102–134). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139174909.007
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174909.007 [Google Scholar]
  13. Engle, R. W.
    (2010) Role of working memory capacity in cognitive control. Current Anthropology, 51(s1), 17–26. 10.1086/650572
     https://doi.org/10.1086/650572 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gilabert, R.
    (2007a) The simultaneous manipulation of task complexity along planning time and (+/− Here and Now): Effects on L2 oral production. InM. Garcia-Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp.44–68). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. (2007b) Effects of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 oral production. IRAL, 45, 215–240. 10.1515/iral.2007.010
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2007.010 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gilabert, R., & Muñoz, C.
    (2010) Differences in attainment and performance of a second language: The role of WMC. International Journal of English Studies, 10(1), 19–42. 10.6018/ijes/2010/1/113961
     https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2010/1/113961 [Google Scholar]
  17. Guará-Tavares, M. G.
    (2009) The relationship among pre-task planning, working memory capacity, and L2 speech performance: A pilot study. Linguagem & Ensino, 12(1), 165–194.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Harrington, M., & Sawyer, M.
    (1992) L2 WMC and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 25–38. 10.1017/S0272263100010457
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100010457 [Google Scholar]
  19. Juffs, A., & Harrington, M.
    (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]
  20. Kane, M. J., Bleckley, M. K., Conway, A. R. A., & Engle, R. W.
    (2001) A controlled-attention view of working memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 169–183. 10.1037/0096‑3445.130.2.169
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.169 [Google Scholar]
  21. Kane, M. J., Conway, A. R. A., Hambrick, D. Z., & Engle, R. W.
    (2007) Variation in WMC as variation in executive attention & control. InA. R. A. Conway, C. Jarrold, M. J. Kane, A. Miyake & J. N. Towse (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp.21–48). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Kawauchi, C.
    (2005) The effects of strategic planning on the oral narratives of learners with low and high intermediate proficiency. InR. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp.143–164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.11.09kaw
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.09kaw [Google Scholar]
  23. 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]
  24. Kormos, J. & Trebits, A.
    (2011) Working memory capacity and narrative task performance. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp.267–286). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tblt.2.17ch10
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2.17ch10 [Google Scholar]
  25. 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, 861–883. 10.3758/s13423‑013‑0565‑2
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0565-2 [Google Scholar]
  26. 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 second language learning (pp.181–209). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.2.12mac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.12mac [Google Scholar]
  27. Mehnert, U.
    (1998) The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 52–83. 10.1017/S0272263198001041
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263198001041 [Google Scholar]
  28. Mochizuki, N., & Ortega, L.
    (2008) Balancing communication and grammar in beginning‐level foreign language classrooms: A study of guided planning and relativization. Language Teaching Research, 12(1), 11‐37. 10.1177/1362168807084492
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807084492 [Google Scholar]
  29. Nielson, K.
    (2014) Can planning time compensate for individual differences in working memory capacity?Language Teaching Research, 18(3), 272–293. 10.1177/1362168813510377
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813510377 [Google Scholar]
  30. Ortega, L.
    (1999) Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 109–148. 10.1017/S0272263199001047
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199001047 [Google Scholar]
  31. (2005) What do learners plan? Learner-driven attention to form during pre-task planning. InR. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp.77–109). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.11.07ort
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.07ort [Google Scholar]
  32. Park, S.
    (2010) The influence of pretask instructions and pretask planning on focus on form during Korean EFL task-based interaction. Language Teaching Research, 14(1), 9–26. 10.1177/1362168809346491
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168809346491 [Google Scholar]
  33. Payne, J. & Ross, B.
    (2005) Synchronous CMC, working memory, and L2 proficiency development. Language Learning and Technology, 19(3), 35–54.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Payne, J. & Whitney, P.
    (2002) Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: Output, working memory, and interlanguage development. CALICO Journal, 20, 7–32. 10.1558/cj.v20i1.7‑32
     https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v20i1.7-32 [Google Scholar]
  35. Rai, M. K., Loschky, L. C., Harris, R. J., Peck, N. R. & Cook, L. G.
    (2011) Effects of stress and working memory capacity on foreign language readers’ inferential processing during comprehension. Language Learning, Language Learning, 61(1), 187–218. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00592.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00592.x [Google Scholar]
  36. Robinson, P.
    (1995a) Attention, memory, and the “noticing” hypothesis. Language Learning, 45(2), 281–331. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1995.tb00441.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00441.x [Google Scholar]
  37. (1995b) Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45(1), 99–140. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1995.tb00964.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00964.x [Google Scholar]
  38. (2001) Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for investigating task influences on SLA. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.287–318). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.012
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.012 [Google Scholar]
  39. (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). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.2.13rob
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.13rob [Google Scholar]
  40. (2005a) Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 46–73. 10.1017/S0267190505000036
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190505000036 [Google Scholar]
  41. (2005b) Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 1–32. 10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  42. (2007) Aptitudes, abilities, contexts, and practice. InR. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in a second language. Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp.256–286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511667275.015
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667275.015 [Google Scholar]
  43. (2011) Second language task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis, language learning, and performance. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp.3–38). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tblt.2.05ch1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2.05ch1 [Google Scholar]
  44. Sangarun, J.
    (2005) The effects of focusing on meaning and form in strategic planning. InR. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp.111–141). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.11.08san
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.08san [Google Scholar]
  45. Skehan, P.
    (1998) A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. (2002) Theorising and updating aptitude. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed second language learning (pp.69–93). Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.2.06ske
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.06ske [Google Scholar]
  47. (2009) Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, flueny, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510–532. 10.1093/applin/amp047
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp047 [Google Scholar]
  48. Skehan, P. & P. Foster
    (1997) Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 1(3), 185–211. 10.1177/136216889700100302
     https://doi.org/10.1177/136216889700100302 [Google Scholar]
  49. Skehan, P., & Foster, P.
    (1999) The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49, 93–120. 10.1111/1467‑9922.00071
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00071 [Google Scholar]
  50. Skehan, P. & Foster, P.
    (2001) Cognition and tasks. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.183–205). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.009
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.009 [Google Scholar]
  51. Sprenger, A. M., Atkins, S. M., Colflesh, G. J. H., Briner, T. L., Buchanan, J. B., Chavis, S. E., Chen, S., Iannuzzi, G. L., Kashtelyan, V., Dowling, E., Bolger, D. J., Bunting, M. F., & Dougherty, M. R.
    (in preparation). A four-dimensional video game for measuring cognitive ability.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Sunderman, G. & Kroll, J.
    (2009) When study-abroad experience fails to deliver: The internal resources threshold effect. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 70–99. 10.1017/S0142716408090048
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716408090048 [Google Scholar]
  53. Unsworth, N. & Engle, R.
    (2007) The nature of individual differences in working memory capacity: Active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search from secondary memory. Psychological Review, 114, 104–132. 10.1037/0033‑295X.114.1.104
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.1.104 [Google Scholar]
  54. Wigglesworth, G.
    (1997) An investigation of planning time and proficiency level on oral test discourse. Language Testing, 14(1), 85–106.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Williams, J.
    (2011) Working memory and SLA. InS. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp.427–441). New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Yuan, F., & Ellis, R.
    (2003) The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24, 1–27. 10.1093/applin/24.1.1
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.1.1 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.19004.bro
Loading
Working memory and planning time as predictors of fluency and accuracy
Journal of Second Language Studies 2, 281 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.19004.bro
/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.19004.bro
/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.19004.bro
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): aptitude; ESL; planning; tasks; working memory capacity

Most Cited

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