Notetaking and Writing from Hypertexts in L1 and L2

References

1. Baccino, T.
   (2004) La lecture électronique [The electronic reading]. Grenoble: PUG.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Barbier, M.-L.
   (2006) Coût de l’exploration d’un site web en L2? [cognitive load of web exploration in L2]. InA. Piolat (Ed.). Lire, écrire, communiquer et apprendre avec Internet [Reading, writing, communicating and learning with Internet] (pp.151–172). Marseille: Editions Solal.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Barbier, M.-L., Faraco, M., Piolat, A., & Branca, S.
   (2004) Prise de notes et procédés de condensation en français L2 par des étudiants anglais, espagnols et japonais [Note-taking and abbreviation procedures in French L2 by English, Spanish, and Japanese students]. InN. Andrieux-Reix, S. Branca, & C. Puech (Eds.). Ecriture abrégées (notes, notules, messages, codes...). L’abréviation entre pratiques spontanées, codifications, modernité et histoire [Abbreviatory writing] (pp.143–161). Gap: Editions Orphys.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Barbier, M.-L., & Piolat, A.
   (2005) L1 and L2 cognitive effort of notetaking and writing. InL. Alla, & B. Schneuwly (Eds.). Proceedings at the SIG Writing Conference 2004 [CD-ROM]. Geneva: Switzerland.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Barbier, M.-L., Piolat, A., & Roussey, J.Y.
   (1998) Effet du traitement de texte et des correcteurs sur la maîtrise de l’orthographe et de la grammaire en langue seconde [Effect of the word processor and the spelling and grammar checkers in second language]. Revue Française de Pédagogie, 122, 83–98.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Barbier, M.-L., Piolat, A., Roussey, J-Y., & Olive, T.
   (2006) Notetaking in second language: Language procedures and self-evaluation of the difficulties. Current Psychology Letters. Brain, Behavior and Cognition, 20(3). [cpl.revues.org/]
   [Google Scholar]
7. Blondel, F.M., Le Touzé, J.C., & Tarizzo, M.
   (2002) ARI: un assistant logiciel pour accompagner la formation à la recherche d’informations [ARI: a software to assist training in search of information]. InFrasson, C., & Pecuchet, J.P. (Eds.), Actes du Colloque TICE2002, INSA, Lyon, November 2002 , pp.167–174.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Chaudron, C., Loschky, L., & Cook, J.
   (1994) Second language listening comprehension and lecture note-taking. InJ. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives (pp.75–92). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Clerehan, R.
   (1995) Taking it down: notetaking practices of L1 and L2 students, English for specific purposes, 14(2), 137–157.
   [Google Scholar]
10. DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J.O.
    (2007) Cognitive load in hypertext reading: a review. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1616–1641.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Faraco, M., Barbier, M.-L., & Piolat, A.
    (2002) A comparison between L1 and L2 notetaking by undergraduate students. InS. Ransdell & M.L. Barbier (Vol.Eds.), & G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), Studies in Writing: Vol.11. New Directions in Research on L2 Writing (pp.145–167). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Gérouit, C., Piolat, A., Roussey, J.-Y., & Barbier, M.-L.
    (2001) Coût attentionnel de la recherche d’informations par des adultes sur hypertexte et sur document papier [Cognitive load of information research by adults on hypertext and on paper document]. InM. Mojahid & J. Virbel (Eds.), Actes du 4° Colloque International sur le Document Electronique (pp.201–215). Paris: Europia Production.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Titsworth, B.S., & Kiewra, K.A.
    (2004) Spoken organizational lecture cues and student note-taking as facilitators of student learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 447–461.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Hannon, B., & Daneman, M.
    (2001) A new tool for measuring and understanding individual differences in the component processes of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 103–128.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Olive, T., Kellogg, R.T., & Piolat, A.
    (2002) The triple task technique for studying the processes of writing: Why and How?InT. Olive & C. M. Levy (Eds.), Contemporary tools and techniques for studying writing (pp.31–59). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Piolat, A., Olive, T., Roussey, J.-Y., Thunin, O., & Ziegler, J.C.
    (1999) SCRIPTKELL: a tool for measuring cognitive effort and time processing in writing and other complex cognitive activities. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(1), 113–121.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Piolat, A., Olive, T., & Kellogg R.T.
    (2005) Cognitive effort of notetaking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 291–312.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Piolat, A., Barbier, M.-L., & Roussey, J.Y.
    (2008) Fluency and cognitive effort during first- and second-language note-taking and writing by undergraduate students. European psychologist, 13(2), 114–125.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Raby, F.
    (2005) A User-Centred Ergonomic Approach to CALL Research. InJ. Elgert. G. Petrie (Eds.), CALL Research Perspectives (pp.179–190). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Rouet, J.F.
    (2003) La compréhension des documents électroniques [Understanding on electronic documents]. InGaonac’h, D. & Fayol, M. (Eds.), Aider les élèves à comprendre [Help learners to understand]. Paris: Hachette Education.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Desmette, D., Hupet, M., Schelstraete, M.A., & Van der Linden, M.
    (1995) Adaptation en langue française du « Reading Span Test » de Daneman et Carpenter (1980) [French adaptation of the « Reading Span test » of Daneman et Carpenter (1980)] L’Année Psychologique, 95, 459–482.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Friedman, N., & Miyake, A.
    (2005) Comparison of four scoring methods for the reading span test. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 581–590.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Ross, S.
    (1998) Self-assessment in second language testing: a meta-analysis and analysis of experiential factors. Language Testing, 15, 1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Spellman-Miller, K.
    (2005) Second language writing research and pedagogy : A role for computer logging?Computers and Composition, 22, 297–317.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Van Waes, L., & Leijten, M.
    (2006) Logging writing processes with Inputlog. InL. Van Waes, M. Leijten & C. Neuwirth (Vol.Eds.), & G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), Studies in Writing: Vol.17. Writing and Digital Media (pp.158–166). Oxford: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]