attention | Yu Tamura's Web

This study investigated how task difficulty affects cognitive processes during self correction in L2 English oral production. Previous studies have explored this issue based on the taxonomy of self correction behavior proposed by Kormos (1999) which classifies self corrections into different-information repair, appropriacy repair, and error repair. This study sought to determine whether learners focus more on concept, lexis, grammar, or phonology when self corrections occur. English learners were given two direction-giving map tasks: one which is cognitively more demanding in generating message (Task High), and the other cognitively less demanding (Task Low). Each task was followed by a stimulated recall interview to determine the learner’s cognitive processes when a self correction was observed. Their comments were categorized into four cognitive stages: conceptualization, lexical encoding, grammatical encoding, and phonological encoding. We hypothesized that Task High would induce more conceptualization than Task Low. The participants focused on the conceptual aspect more frequently than the grammatical aspect during Task High, while no difference in cognitive process was found in Task Low. The results also revealed that, while there was no significant difference in conceptualization between high-proficient and low-proficient learners, the more proficient learners tended to focus more on grammatical aspects than lexical.

Kobayashi, M., Iwatani, M., Tamura, Y., & Abe, D. (2019). Cognitive processes during self correction in L2 oral production: Comparison between tasks with a high and a low cognitive demand. LET Journal of Central Japan, 30, 31–44.

Recent studies have shown that languaging contributes to second language skill development. Feedback is often used in combination with languaging as a prompt of verbalization during writing revision, and this combination has shown the effect of increasing the quality of writing. The present study tested whether and how indirect feedback helps learners engage in languaging, and whether the effects continued with the second new writing on the same topic. Forty participants engaged in a three-stage writing task: writing a first draft, revision with languaging with/without feedback on specific grammatical or lexical errors, and writing the second draft. Writing was multidimensionally assessed in terms of syntactic complexity, grammatical accuracy, and fluency. The results showed that the participants focused more on grammar when they were given feedback and succeeded in more error correction than when they did not receive feedback. Learners improved in fluency and slightly in accuracy, but not in complexity, regardless of the existence of indirect feedback. Importantly, written languaging with feedback did not show superiority to written languaging without feedback in skill development. The findings suggest that even metalinguistic correction induced by feedback is not always necessarily effective, but languaging may have a positive effect on overall writing quality.