1887
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.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.19004.bro
2019-10-08
2019-12-12
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]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.19004.bro
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.19004.bro
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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