Cover not available
Part of
Expanding Individual Difference Research in the Interaction Approach: Investigating learners, instructors, and other interlocutors
Edited by Laura Gurzynski-Weiss
[AILA Applied Linguistics Series 16] 2017
► pp. 19–40

Chapter 2
Overview of learner individual differences and their mediating effects on the process and outcome of L2 interaction

| Adam Mickiewicz University, Kalisz, Poland | State University of Applied Sciences, Konin, Poland

Even though numerous factors are likely to contribute to the outcomes of both naturalistic and instructed second language acquisition, such as the amount of exposure to the target language (TL), the beliefs, dedication, experience, involvement and qualifications of the instructor, or the teaching methods and materials employed, individual learner differences appear to play a significant role in second or foreign language (L2) learning. While specific classifications vary, such individual difference (ID) variables can be sociocultural (e.g., beliefs, attitudes, experience), cognitive (e.g., age, aptitude, working memory, cognitive styles, learning strategies), and affective (e.g., anxiety, personality, motivation, willingness to communicate) in nature, with some IDs cutting across clear-cut categories, themselves being affected by each other and a host of other variables (Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015; Gregersen & MacIntyre, 2014; Pawlak, 2012a). This paper provides a brief overview of selected factors in these areas, with particular emphasis being placed on the influence that they are likely to exert on interactions that take place between learners, and between learners and instructors in the language classroom, as well as the ways in which such interactions can contribute to L2 learning. With this in mind, some key assumptions will first be spelled out, which will be followed by the discussion of the latest research findings in each area, subsequently focusing on research undertaken in the interactionist approach. Finally, future research directions will be outlined, methodological issues will be touched upon, and implications for classroom practice will be considered.

Keywords: corrective feedback, individual differences, negotiated interaction
Article outline
  • Introduction
    • Definitions and caveats
    • Research into learner individual differences
    • Learner individual differences in interactionist research
  • Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 12 December 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.16.02paw
References

References

Ammar, A.
(2008) Prompts and recasts: Differential effects on second language morphosyntax. Language Teaching Research, 12, 183–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baddeley, A. D.
(2007) Working memory, thought, and action. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bandura, A.
(1986) Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Biedroń, A.
(2011) Personality factors as predictors of foreign language aptitude. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1, 467–489. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biedroń, A., & Pawlak, M.
(2016) New conceptualizations of linguistic giftedness. Language Teaching, 49, 151–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. B.
(1959) Use of the Modern Language Aptitude Test in secondary schools. Yearbook of the National Council on Measurements Used in Education, 16, 155–159.Google Scholar
(1981) Twenty-five years of research on foreign language aptitude. In K. C. Diller (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude (pp. 83–118). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Cohen, A. D.
(2010) Focus on the language learner: Styles, strategies and motivation. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 161–178). London. Hodder Education.Google Scholar
(2014) Strategies in learning and using a second language. (2nd ed.) New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cohen, A. D., & Griffiths, C.
(2015) Revisiting LLS research forty years later. TESOL Quarterly, 49, 414–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, A. D., Oxford, R. L., & Chi, J. C.
(2001) Learning Style Survey. [URL]
De Costa, P. I.
(2015) Re-envisioning language anxiety in the globalized classroom through a social imaginary lens. Language Learning, 65, 504–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M.
(2014) Age effects in second language learning. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 442–460). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Denies, K., Yashima, T., & Janssen, R.
(2015) Classroom versus societal willingness to communicate: Investigating French as a second language in Flanders. Modern Language Journal, 99, 718–739. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dewaele, J. M.
(2004) Individual differences in the use of colloquial vocabulary: The effects of sociobiological and psychological factors. In P. Bogaards, & B. Laufer (Eds.), Vocabulary in a second language: Selection, acquisition, and testing (pp. 127–153). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dewaele, J. M. & Al-Saraj, T. M.
(2015) Foreign language classroom anxiety of Arab learners of English: The effect of personality, linguistic and sociobiographical variables. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 5, 205–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dewaele, J. M., MacIntyre, P. M., Boudreau, C., & Dewaele, L.
(2016) Do girls have all the fun? Anxiety and enjoyment in the foreign language classroom. Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition, 2, 41–63.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z.
(2005) The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2009a) The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2009b) The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity, and the self (pp. 9–42). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(2014) Researching complex dynamic systems: ‘Retrodictive qualitative modelling’ in the language classroom. Language Teaching, 47, 80–91.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P. D., & Henry, A.
(Eds.) (2015) Motivational dynamics in language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S.
(2015) The psychology of the language learner revisited. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ehrman, M. E., & Leaver, B. L.
(2003) Cognitive styles in the service of language learning. System, 31, 391–415. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2007) Implicit and explicit learning, knowledge, and instruction. In R. Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder, J. Philp, H. Reinders, and R. Erlam (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing, and teaching (pp. 3–25). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(2008) The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2010) Epilogue: A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 335–349. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Form-focused approaches to learning, teaching, and researching grammar. In M. A. Christison, D. Christian, P. A. Duff, & N. Spada (Eds.), Teaching and learning English grammar: Research findings and future directions (pp. 194–213). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S.
(2001) Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51, 281–318. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Doing focus on form. System, 30, 419–432. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M., Behney, J. N., & Uzum, B.
(2013) Inhibitory control, working memory and L2 interaction. In K. Droździał-Szelest & M. Pawlak (Eds.), Psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic perspectives on second language learning and teaching. Studies in honor of Waldemar Marton (pp. 91–114). Heidelberg: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A.
(2015) Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (2nd ed., pp. 175–199). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E.
(1986) Sex differences in NNS/NNS interactions. In R. R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 327–351). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Goo, J.
(2012) Corrective feedback and working memory capacity in interaction-driven L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 445–474. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gregersen, T., & MacIntyre, P.
(2014) Capitalizing on language learners’ individuality: From premise to practice. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Griffiths, C.
(2012) Learning styles: Traversing the quagmire. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan, & M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for language learning (pp. 151–168). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) The strategy factor in successful language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Havranek, G.
(2002) When is corrective feedback most likely to succeed? International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 225–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, J.
(1998) Complimenting a positive politeness strategy. In J. Coates (Ed.), Language and gender: A reader (pp. 100–112). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Horwitz, E. K.
(1988) The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign language students. Modern Language Journal, 72, 283–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M., & Hope, J. M.
(1986) Foreign language classroom anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 70, 125–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ishida, M.
(2004) Effects of recasts on the acquisition of the aspectual form ‘-te i-(ru)’ by learners of Japanese as a foreign language. Language Learning, 54, 311–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalaja, P.
(2016) Key issues relevant to the studies to be reported: Beliefs, agency, and identity. In P. Kalaja, A. M. F. Barcelos, M. Aro, & M. Ruohotie-Lyhty (Eds.), Beliefs, agency and identity in foreign language learning and teaching (pp. 8–24). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kalaja, P., & Barcelos, A. M. F.
(Eds.) (2003) Beliefs about SLA: New research approaches. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kowal, M., & Swain, M.
(1994) Using collaborative language production tasks to promote students ‘language awareness’. Language Awareness, 3, 73–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L.
(2008) Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Li, S.
(2014) The interface between feedback type, L2 proficiency, and the nature of linguistic target. Language Teaching Research, 18, 373–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loewen, S.
(2011) Focus on form. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language learning and teaching. (Vol. 2, pp. 576–592). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2014) Instructed second language acquisition. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. M.
(2006) Corrective feedback in the chat room: An experimental study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19, 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H.
(1983) Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5, 177–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996) The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of research on second language acquisition (Vol. 2, pp. 413–468). New York, NY: Academy Press.Google Scholar
(2013) Maturational constraints on child and adult SLA. In G. Granena & M. H. Long (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment (pp. 3–41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, P. D.
(2007) Willingness to communicate in the second language: Understanding the decision to speak as a volitional process. Modern Language Journal, 91, 564–576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, P. M., & Gardner, R. C.
(1994) The subtle effects of language anxiety on cognitive processing in the second language. Language Learning, 44, 283–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, P. D., & Legatto, J. J.
(2011) A dynamic system approach to willingness to communicate: Developing an idiodynamic method to capture rapidly changing affect. Applied Linguistics, 32, 149–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A.
(2012) Input, interaction, and corrective feedback in L2 learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Abbuhl, R., & Gass, S. M.
(2014) Interactionist approach. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 7–23). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Adams, R., Stafford, C. & Winke, P.
(2010) Exploring the relationship between modified output and working memory capacity. Language Learning, 60, 501–533. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., Oliver, R., & Leeman, J.
(2003) Interactional input and the incorporation of feedback: An exploration of NS-NNS and NNS-NNS adult and child dyads. Language Learning, 53, 35–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Philp, J.
(1998) Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? Modern Language Journal, 82, 338–356. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., Philp, J., Egi, T., Fujii, A. & Tatsumi, T.
(2002) Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback, and L2 development. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 181–209). Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Polio, C.
(2009) Introduction. In A. Mackey & C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on interaction: Second language research in honor of Susan M. Gass (pp. 1–10). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Sachs, R.
(2011) Older learners in SLA research: A first look at working memory, feedback, and L2 development. Language Learning, 62, 1–37.Google Scholar
McCrea, R. R., & Costa, P. T.
(2003) Personality in adulthood: A five-factor theory perspective (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McDonough, K., & Mackey, A.
(2006) Responses to recasts: Repetition, primed production, and language development. Language Learning, 56, 693–720. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mercer, S.
(2012) Dispelling the myth of the natural-born linguist. ELT Journal, 66, 22–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A., & Pawlak, M.
(2017) Willingness to communicate in instructed second language acquisition: Combining a macro- and micro-perspective. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Nagata, N.
(1993) Intelligent computer feedback for second language instruction. Modern Language Journal, 77, 330–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nakatani, Y., & Goh, C.
(2007) A review of oral communication strategies: Focus on interactionist and psycholinguistic perspectives. In A. D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies: Thirty years of research and practice (pp. 207–227). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H.
(2015) The interactional feedback dimension in instructed second language learning. Linking theory, research, and practice. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Oliver, R.
(2000) Age differences in negotiation and feedback in classroom and pairwork. Language Learning, 50, 119–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) The patterns of negotiation of meaning in child interactions. Modern Language Journal, 86, 97–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oxford, R. L.
(1990) Language learning strategies. What every teacher should know. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
(1999) Style wars as a source of anxiety in language classrooms. In D. J. Young (Ed.), Affect in second language learning: A practical guide to dealing with language anxiety (pp. 216–237). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
(2001) Language learning styles and strategies. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed., pp. 369–366). Boston, MA: Heine & Heinle.Google Scholar
(2011) Teaching and researching language learning strategies. New York, NY: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
(2017) Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Self-regulation in context. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Papi, M., & Teimouri, Y.
(2014) Language learner motivational types: A cluster analysis study. Language Learning, 64, 493–525. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pawlak, M.
(2012a) Individual differences in language learning and teaching: Achievements, prospects and challenges. In M. Pawlak (Ed.), New perspectives on individual differences in language learning and teaching (pp. xix–xlvi). Heidelberg: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012b) The dynamic nature of motivation in language learning: A classroom perspective. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2, 249–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013a) Comparing learners’ and teachers’ beliefs about form-focused instruction. In D. Gabryś-Barker, E. Piechurska-Kuciel, & J. Zybert (Eds.), Investigations in teaching and learning languages: Studies in honor of Hanna Komorowska (pp. 109–131). Heidelberg: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013b) Researching grammar learning strategies: Combining the macro- and micro-perspective. In Ł. Salski, W. Szubko-Sitarek, & J. Majer (Eds.), Perspectives on foreign language learning (pp. 191–210). Łódź: University of Łódź Press.Google Scholar
(2015, March). Willingness to communicate as a factor influencing the effectiveness of input-providing and output-prompting oral corrective feedback. Paper presented at the American Association for Applied Linguistics Conference, Toronto.
Pawlak, M., Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A., & Bielak, J.
(2016) Investigating the nature of classroom WTC: A micro-perspective. Language Teaching Research, 20, 654–671. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pfenninger, S. E.
(2014) The misunderstood variable: Age effects as a function of type of instruction. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 4, 529–556. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pica, T., & Doughty, C.
(1985) Input and interaction in the communicative language classroom: A comparison of teacher-fronted and group activities. In S. M. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 115–32). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., & Morgenthaller, L.
(1989) Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 63–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piechurska-Kuciel, E.
(2008) Language anxiety in secondary grammar school students. Opole: University of Opole Press.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M.
(2015) Processability theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (2nd ed., pp. 159–179). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Piniel, K., & Csizér, K.
(2013) L2 motivation, anxiety and self-efficacy: The interrelationship of individual variables in the secondary school context. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 3, 523–550. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L.
(2011) The effectiveness of second language strategy instruction. Language Learning, 61, 993–1038. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Porter, P.
(1986) How learners talk to each other: Input and interaction in task-centered discussions. In R. R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 200–222). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Rassaei, E.
(2015) Recasts, field dependence-independence cognitive style, and L2 development. Language Teaching Research, 19, 499–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, L., & Meyer, A.
(2012) Individual differences in second language learning: Introduction. Language Learning, 62(Suppl. 2), 1–4. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P.
(2002) Learning conditions, aptitude complexes and SLA: A framework for research and pedagogy. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 113–133). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rose, H. L.
(2012) Reconceptualizing strategic learning in the face of self-regulation: Throwing language learning strategies out with the bathwater. Applied Linguistics, 33, 92–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross-Feldman, L.
(2007) Interaction in the L2 classroom: Does gender influence learning opportunities? In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 53–77). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rubin, J.
(1975) What the ‘good language learner’ can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 41–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rubin, J., Chamot, A. U., Harris, V., & Anderson, N. J.
(2007) Intervening in the use of strategies. In A. D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.). Language learner strategies: Thirty years of research and practice (pp. 141–160). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sagarra, N.
(2007) From CALL to face-to-face interaction: The effect of computer-delivered recasts and working memory on L2 development. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 229–248). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sagarra, N., & Abbuhl, R.
(2013) Optimizing the noticing of recasts via computer-delivered feedback: Evidence that oral input enhancement and working memory help second language learning. Modern Language Journal, 97, 196–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sheen, Y.
(2007) The effect of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 301–322). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2008) Recasts, language anxiety, modified output, and L2 learning. Language Learning, 58, 835–874. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shin, S. Y., Lidster, R., Sabra, S., & Yeager, R.
(2016) The effects of L2 proficiency differences in pairs on idea units in a collaborative text reconstruction task. Language Teaching Research, 20, 366–386. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singleton, D.
(2016) CPH theory, early classroom instruction and age-related issues that are separable from age. In M. Pawlak (Ed.), Classroom-oriented research: Reconciling theory and practice (pp. 213–241). Heidelberg: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P.
(2002) Theorizing and updating aptitude. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 69–95). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Language aptitude. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 381–395). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J.
(2002) The theory of successful intelligence and its implications for language aptitude testing. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 13–43). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swain, M.
(1985) Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
(2005) The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Tannen, D.
(1990) You just don’t understand. Women and men in conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tavakoli, M., & Zarrinabadi, N.
(2016) Differential effects of explicit and implicit corrective feedback on EFL learners’ willingness to communicate. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 10, 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teimouri, Y.
(2016) L2 selves, emotions, and motivated behaviors. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trofimovich, P., Ammar, A., & Gatbonton, E.
(2007) How effective are recasts? The role of attention, memory, and analytical ability. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 171–195). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vandergrift, L., Goh, C., Mareschal, C., & Tafaghodtari, M. H.
(2006) The Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ): Development and validation. Language Learning, 56, 431–462. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Varnosfadrani, A. D., Basturkmen, H.
(2009) The effectiveness of implicit and explicit error correction on learners’ performance. System, 37, 82–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vatz, K., Tare, M., Jackson, S. R., & Doughty, C. J.
(2013) Aptitude-treatment interaction studies in second language acquisition: Findings and methodology. In G. Granena & M. H. Long (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment (pp. 272–292). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wen, Z.
(2014) Theorizing and measuring working memory in first and second language research. Language Teaching, 47, 174–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. N.
(2014) Working memory and SLA. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 427–441). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Williams, M., Mercer, S., & Ryan, S.
(2015) Exploring psychology in language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yule, G., & McDonald, D.
(1990) Resolving referential conflicts in L2 interaction: The effect of proficiency and interactive role. Language Learning, 40, 539–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 12 other publications

Chen, Tzu-Hua
2023. Dynamic fluctuations in foreign language enjoyment during cognitively simple and complex interactive speaking tasks. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 13:3 ► pp. 627 ff. DOI logo
Derakhshan, Ali, Jalil Fathi, Mirosław Pawlak & Mariusz Kruk
2022. Classroom social climate, growth language mindset, and student engagement: the mediating role of boredom in learning English as a foreign language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Gurzynski-Weiss, Laura
2020. Chapter 1. Introducing cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual differences. In Cross-theoretical Explorations of Interlocutors and their Individual Differences [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 53], ► pp. 4 ff. DOI logo
Gurzynski-Weiss, Laura
2020. Chapter 10. Synthesizing cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual differences. In Cross-theoretical Explorations of Interlocutors and their Individual Differences [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 53], ► pp. 248 ff. DOI logo
Lika, Brygida
2023. Introduction. In The Impact of Openness and Ambiguity Tolerance on Learning English as a Foreign Language [Second Language Learning and Teaching, ], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Palágyi, Tivadar, Mária Medveczká & Mojmír Malovecký
2023. RIFLESSIONI DI STUDENTI DI L1 SLOVACCA SUL TEMPO E L’ASPETTO IN ITALIANO: UNO STUDIO DI CASO. Italiano LinguaDue 15:2 ► pp. 133 ff. DOI logo
Pawlak, Miroslaw
2020. Chapter 3. The effect of proficiency, gender, and learning style on the occurrence of negotiated interaction in communicative task performance. In Cross-theoretical Explorations of Interlocutors and their Individual Differences [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 53], ► pp. 52 ff. DOI logo
Pawlak, Mirosław
2021. Investigating language learning strategies: Prospects, pitfalls and challenges. Language Teaching Research 25:5 ► pp. 817 ff. DOI logo
Pawlak, Mirosław, Kata Csizér, Mariusz Kruk & Joanna Zawodniak
2022. Investigating grit in second language learning: The role of individual difference factors and background variables. Language Teaching Research ► pp. 136216882211057 ff. DOI logo
Pawlak, Mirosław, Mariusz Kruk & Joanna Zawodniak
2022. Investigating individual trajectories in experiencing boredom in the language classroom: The case of 11 Polish students of English. Language Teaching Research 26:4 ► pp. 598 ff. DOI logo
Pawlak, Mirosław, Joanna Zawodniak & Mariusz Kruk
2020. The neglected emotion of boredom in teaching English to advanced learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 30:3 ► pp. 497 ff. DOI logo
Ruiz, Simón, Patrick Rebuschat & Detmar Meurers
2021. The effects of working memory and declarative memory on instructed second language vocabulary learning: Insights from intelligent CALL. Language Teaching Research 25:4 ► pp. 510 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.