Chapter 7
Immediate versus delayed oral negative feedback
A comparison of psycholinguistic advantages
Long’s Interaction Hypothesis (1981, 1983) provides a theoretical framework for understanding how interaction can contribute to second language (L2) acquisition. Specifically, negative feedback provided during interaction is viewed as a feature that can facilitate L2 development by drawing learners’ attention to problematic forms (Long, 1996). Long’s influential hypotheses were originally formulated in the context of face-to-face conversational interaction and, therefore, negative feedback was understood as feedback that is provided immediately to the learner in oral conversation. However, negative feedback cannot always be provided immediately to L2 learners. In distance language learning settings where the L2 is learned online and where communication between learner and instructor may take place asynchronously, feedback cannot be provided during a communicative task and it is provided at a later time, for example, at the end of a teaching unit.
Article outline
- Introduction
- The interaction hypothesis
- Factors moderating the effectiveness of negative feedback
- Arguments for the utility of delayed feedback
- Future research directions
- Type of cognitive processing
- Source of error attribution
- Relative effectiveness of delayed feedback
- Conclusion
-
References
References (40)
Arroyo, D. C., & Yilmaz, Y.
(
2018)
An open for replication study: The role of feedback timing in synchronous computer-mediated communication.
Language Learning,
68, 942–972.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Canals, L., Granena, G., Yilmaz, Y., & Malicka, A.
(
2020)
Second language learners’ and teachers’ perceptions of delayed immediate corrective feedback in an asynchronous online setting: An exploratory study.
TESL Canada Journal,
37, 181–209.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Canals, L., Granena, G., Yilmaz, Y., & Malicka, A.
(
2021)
The relative effectiveness of immediate and delayed corrective feedback in video-based computer-mediated communication.
Language Teaching Research. Advanced online publication.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeKeyser, R. M.
(
2003)
Implicit and explicit learning. In
C. J. Doughty &
M. H. Long (Eds.),
The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313–348). Blackwell.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Doughty, C. J.
(
2001)
Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In
P. Robinson (Ed.),
Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206–257). Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Doughty, C. J., & Long, M. H.
(
2003)
Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning.
Language, Learning & Technology,
7, 50–80.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ellis, R.
(
2005)
Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
27, 141–172.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R.
(
2006)
Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
28, 339–368.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Elsey, J. W. B., Van Ast, V. A., & Kindt, M.
(
2018)
Human memory reconsolidation: A guiding framework and critical review of the evidence.
Psychological Bulletin,
144, 797–848.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Granena, G.
(
2019)
Cognitive aptitudes and L2 speaking proficiency: Links between LLAMA and Hi-LAB.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
41(2), 313–336.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harmer, J.
(
2007)
The practice of English language teaching (4th ed.). Pearson.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hatch, E. M.
(
1978)
Discourse analysis and second language acquisition. In
E. Hatch (Ed.),
Second language acquisition: A book of readings (pp. 401–435). Newbury House.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heift, T., Nguyen, P., & Hegelheimer, V.
(
2021)
Technology-mediated corrective feedback. In
H. Nassaji &
E. Kartchava (Eds.),
Corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching (pp. 226–250). Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Henderson, C.
(
2020)
Perfect timing? Exploring the effects of immediate and delayed corrective feedback, communication mode, and working memory on the acquisition of Spanish as a foreign language (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University.
Lee, J. L. C., Nader, K., & Schiller, D.
(
2017)
An update on memory reconsolidation updating.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences,
21, 531–545.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Li, S., Zhu, Y., & Ellis, R.
(
2016)
The effects of the timing of corrective feedback on the acquisition of a new linguistic structure.
The Modern Language Journal,
100, 276–295.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Long, M. H.
(
1981)
Input, interaction and second language acquisition. In
H. Winitz (Ed.),
Native language and foreign language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,
379, 259–278.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Long, M. H.
(
1983a)
Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input.
Applied Linguistics,
4, 126–141.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Long, M. H.
(
1983b)
Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
5, 177–193.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Long, M. H.
(
1988)
Instructed interlanguage development. In
L. Beebe (Ed.),
Issues in second language acquisition: Multiple perspectives (pp. 115–141). Newbury House.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Long, M. H.
(
1996)
The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In
W. C. Ritchie &
T. K. Bahtia (Eds.),
Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). Academic Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Long, M. H.
to appear).
The psycholinguistics of L2 interaction. In
A. Godfroid &
H. Hopp Eds.
The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and psycholinguistics Routledge
Long, M. H., & Robinson, P.
(
1998)
Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In
C. J. Doughty &
J. Williams (Eds.),
Focus on form in classroom SLA (pp. 15–41). Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M.
(
2005)
Second language research: Methodology and design. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Plonsky, L., & Brown, D.
(
2015)
Domain definition and search techniques in meta-analyses of L2 research (Or why 18 meta-analyses of feedback have different results).
Second Language Research,
31, 267–278.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Quinn, P.
(
2014)
Delayed versus immediate corrective feedback on orally produced passive errors in English (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Quinn, P.
(
2021)
The timing of corrective feedback. In
H. Nassaji &
E. Kartchava (Eds.),
Corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching (pp. 322–340). Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Révész, A., & Han, Z.
(
2006)
Task content familiarity, task type, and efficacy of recasts.
Language Awareness,
15, 160–179.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sheen, Y.
(
2007)
The effects 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 University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shintani, N., & Aubrey, S.
(
2016)
The effectiveness of synchronous and asynchronous written corrective feedback on grammatical accuracy in a computer-mediated environment.
The Modern Language Journal,
100, 296–319.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Suzuki, Y., & DeKeyser, R.
(
2015)
Does elicited imitation measure implicit knowledge? Evidence from the word-monitoring task.
Language Learning,
65, 860–895.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vafaee, P., Suzuki, Y., & Kachisnke, I.
(
2017)
Validating grammaticality judgment tests: Evidence from two new psycholinguistic measures.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
39, 59–95.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yilmaz, Y.
(
2012)
The relative effects of explicit correction and recasts on two target structures via two communication modes.
Language Learning,
62, 1134–1169.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yilmaz, Y.
(
2013)
Relative effects of explicit and implicit feedback: The role of working memory capacity and language analytic ability.
Applied Linguistics,
34, 344–368.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yilmaz, Y.
(
2016)
The role of exposure condition in the effectiveness of explicit correction.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
38, 65–96.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yilmaz, Y., & Yuksel, D.
(
2011)
Effects of communication mode and salience on recasts: A first exposure study.
Language Teaching Research,
15, 457–477.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yilmaz, Y., & Granena, G.
(
2021)
Implicitness and explicitness in cognitive abilities and corrective feedback. A double dissociation? Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
43(3), 523–550.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by 1 other publications
Murphy, Bridget, Jessica Mackay & Elsa Tragant
2023.
‘Ok I think I was totally wrong:) new try!’: language learning in WhatsApp through the provision of delayed corrective feedback provided during and after task performance.
The Language Learning Journal 51:4
► pp. 491 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 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.