Article published in:Cognitive Individual Differences in Second Language Processing and Acquisition
Edited by Gisela Granena, Daniel O. Jackson and Yucel Yilmaz
[Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 3] 2016
► pp. 327–349
The role of explicit language aptitude in implicit, explicit, and mixed feedback conditions
This study examined whether there is any relationship between second language (L2) learning outcomes under different negative feedback conditions and cognitive abilities for language learning that involve explicit cognitive processes (i.e. explicit language aptitude). The study followed a pretest, immediate posttest, delayed posttest design, and used a set of controlled oral production tests as outcome measures. Between the pretest and the immediate posttest, 80 L2 learners of English carried out three oral production tasks, in which their errors on the indefinite article were treated according to the group they had been assigned to (i.e. explicit, implicit, mixed, reduced explicit or no-feedback). Three subtests from the LLAMA Language Aptitude Test battery (Meara 2005) were used to test the learners’ explicit language aptitude. Results showed that only on the immediate posttest and only under the explicit feedback condition was explicit language aptitude predictive of L2 performance.
- 2.Relative effectiveness of feedback types
- 3.Explicit language aptitude (ELA)
- 4.Present study
- 5.2Target structure
- 5.3.1Story retelling
- 5.3.2Spot the difference
- 5.3.3Guided oral production
- 5.4.1Story retelling
- 5.4.2Spot the difference
- 5.4.3Guided oral production
- 5.5Explicit language aptitude tests
- 5.6Treatment groups
- 5.6.4Reduced explicit
- 5.6.5No feedback
Published online: 23 December 2016
Abrahamsson, N., & Hyltenstam, K.
Carroll, J. B.
Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S.
Carroll, S., & Swain, M.
Caspi, O., & Bell, I. R.
Cronbach, L., & Snow, R.
Doughty, C., & Varela, E.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J.
Doughty, C., Campbell, S., Mislevy, M., Bunting, M., Bowles, A., & Koeth, J.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R.
Goad, H., & White, L.
Goo, J., & Mackey, A.
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G.
Liu, D., & Gleason, J. I.
Loewen, S., & Nabei, T.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L.
Lyster, R., & Saito, K.
Mackey, A., & Goo, J.
Mackey, A., Philp, J., Egi, T., Fujii, A., & Tatsumi, T.
(1978) [Review of the book Aptitudes and instructional methods: A handbook for research on interactions]. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 9, 390–395. Retrieved from JSTOR Web site: http://www.jstor.org/stable/748778
Ortega, L., & Long, M. H.
Russell, J., & Spada, N.
(1994) Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. In Hulstijn, J. H., & Schmidt, R. (Eds.), Consciousness and second language learning: Conceptual, methodological and practical issues in language learning and teaching. Thematic issue of AILA Review,, 11, 11–26.
Sparks, R. L., Patton, J., Ganschow, L., & Humbach, N.
Trofimovich, P., Ammar, A., & Gatbonton, E.
Vatz, K., Tare, M., Jackson, S. R., & Doughty, C. J.
Yilmaz, Y., & Granena, G.
Cited by 1 other publications
Bokander, Lars & Emanuel Bylund
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 may 2022. 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.