Article published in:
Learning and Teaching L2 Writing
Guest-edited by Daphne van Weijen, Elke Van Steendam and Gert Rijlaarsdam
[ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 156] 2008
► pp. 31–50
Published online: 01 January 2008
https://doi.org/10.2143/ITL.156.0.2034419
References

References

Baccino, T.
(2004) La lecture électronique [The electronic reading]. Grenoble: PUG.Google Scholar
Barbier, M.-L.
(2006) Coût de l’exploration d’un site web en L2? [cognitive load of web exploration in L2]. In A. Piolat (Ed.). Lire, écrire, communiquer et apprendre avec Internet [Reading, writing, communicating and learning with Internet] (pp. 151–172). Marseille: Editions Solal.Google Scholar
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]. In N. 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
Barbier, M.-L., & Piolat, A.
(2005) L1 and L2 cognitive effort of notetaking and writing. In L. Alla, & B. Schneuwly (Eds.). Proceedings at the SIG Writing Conference 2004 [CD-ROM]. Geneva: Switzerland.Google Scholar
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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
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). [http://​cpl​.revues​.org/]
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]. In Frasson, C., & Pecuchet, J.P. (Eds.), Actes du Colloque TICE2002, INSA, Lyon, November 2002 , pp.167–174.Google Scholar
Chaudron, C., Loschky, L., & Cook, J.
(1994) Second language listening comprehension and lecture note-taking. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives (pp.75–92). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clerehan, R.
(1995) Taking it down: notetaking practices of L1 and L2 students, English for specific purposes, 14(2), 137–157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J.O.
(2007) Cognitive load in hypertext reading: a review. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1616–1641. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Faraco, M., Barbier, M.-L., & Piolat, A.
(2002) A comparison between L1 and L2 notetaking by undergraduate students. In S. 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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
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]. In M. Mojahid & J. Virbel (Eds.), Actes du 4° Colloque International sur le Document Electronique (pp.201–215). Paris: Europia Production.Google Scholar
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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Olive, T., Kellogg, R.T., & Piolat, A.
(2002) The triple task technique for studying the processes of writing: Why and How? In T. Olive & C. M. Levy (Eds.), Contemporary tools and techniques for studying writing (pp.31–59). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Piolat, A., Olive, T., & Kellogg R.T.
(2005) Cognitive effort of notetaking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 291–312. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Raby, F.
(2005) A User-Centred Ergonomic Approach to CALL Research. In J. Elgert. G. Petrie (Eds.), CALL Research Perspectives (pp.179–190). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Rouet, J.F.
(2003) La compréhension des documents électroniques [Understanding on electronic documents]. In Gaonac’h, D. & Fayol, M. (Eds.), Aider les élèves à comprendre [Help learners to understand]. Paris: Hachette Education.Google Scholar
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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, N., & Miyake, A.
(2005) Comparison of four scoring methods for the reading span test. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 581–590. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ross, S.
(1998) Self-assessment in second language testing: a meta-analysis and analysis of experiential factors. Language Testing, 15, 1–20.Google Scholar
Spellman-Miller, K.
(2005) Second language writing research and pedagogy : A role for computer logging? Computers and Composition, 22, 297–317. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Waes, L., & Leijten, M.
(2006) Logging writing processes with Inputlog. In L. 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
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Olive, Thierry & Marie-Laure Barbier
2017. Processing Time and Cognitive Effort of Longhand Note Taking When Reading and Summarizing a Structured or Linear Text. Written Communication 34:2 ► pp. 224 ff. Crossref logo
Tindle, Richard & Mitchell G. Longstaff
2016. Investigating the lower level demands of writing: handwriting movements interfere with immediate verbal serial recall. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 28:4 ► pp. 443 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 03 november 2020. 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.