Article published In:
Journal of Second Language PronunciationVol. 9:1 (2023) ► pp.47–70
The characteristics and effects of peer feedback on second language pronunciation
In order to investigate the characteristics and effects of peer feedback targeting second language (L2) pronunciation, the present study recruited 32 Mandarin-speaking learners of English who received five pronunciation instructional sessions through an instant messaging application on their smart phones. The phonological targets, types, and formats of peer feedback as well as its effects on their pronunciation (i.e., comprehensibility and accentedness) were examined. Results revealed that the participants mainly targeted segmental errors rather than suprasegmental errors and that they tended to provide more feedback on vowels rather than on consonants. Their feedback, delivered mainly in writing, was found to be effective in improving learners’ comprehensibility, but not their accentedness. The findings demonstrate the potential of peer feedback complementary to teacher feedback in instructed L2 pronunciation and highlight the importance of training in optimizing the effectiveness of peer feedback.
Article outline
- 1.Background
- 1.1The goal of instructed L2 pronunciation and teacher corrective feedback
- 1.2Peer feedback in instructed L2 acquisition
- 2.Methodology
- 2.1Participants
- 2.2Procedure
- 2.2.1Peer feedback and teacher feedback conditions
- Read-aloud phase
- Feedback intervention phase
- Post-feedback reading phase
- 2.2.2Control condition
- 2.2.3Testing sessions
- 2.2.1Peer feedback and teacher feedback conditions
- 2.3Data analysis
- 3.Results
- 3.1Phonological targets, types, and formats of peer feedback (research question 1)
- 3.2Effects of peer feedback on L2 speech comprehensibility and accentedness (research question 2)
- 4.Discussion
- 4.1Characteristics of peer feedback on L2 pronunciation
- 4.2Effects of peer feedback on L2 speech comprehensibility and accentedness
- 5.Conclusion
-
References
References (60)
Akiyama, Y. (2017). Learner beliefs and corrective feedback in telecollaboration: A longitudinal investigation. System,
64
1, 58–73. 
Al-Busaidi, S., & Al-Saqqaf, A. H. (2015). English spelling errors made by Arabic-speaking students. English Language Teaching,
8
(7), 181–199.
Berggren, J. (2015). Learning from giving feedback: A study of secondary-level students. ELT Journal,
69
(1), 58–70.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Coté, R. A. (2014). Peer feedback in anonymous peer review in an EFL writing class in Spain. GiST Education and Learning Research Journal,
9
1, 67–87.
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (1997). Accent, intelligibility, and comprehensibility: Evidence from four L1s. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
19
(1), 1–16.
(2005). Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A research-based approach. TESOL Quarterly,
39
(3), 379–397.
(2009). Comprehensibility as a factor in listener interaction preferences: Implications for the workplace. Canadian Modern Language Review,
66
(2), 181–202.
(2013). The development of L2 oral language skills in two L1 groups: A 7-year study. Language Learning,
63
(2), 163–185.
Doughty, C. J., & Long, M. H. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology,
7
(3), 50–80.
Dunlap, J. C., & Grabinger, S. (2003). Preparing students for lifelong learning: A review of instructional features and teaching methodologies. Performance Improvement Quarterly,
16
(2), 6–25.
Evers, K., & Chen, S. (2020). Effects of an automatic speech recognition system with peer feedback on pronunciation instruction for adults. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–21.
Foster, P., & Ohta, A. S. (2005). Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied Linguistics,
26
(3), 402–430.
Fujii, A., Ziegler, N., & Mackey, A. (2016). Peer interaction and metacognitive instruction in the EFL classroom. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger. (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 63–89). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kim, D., Rueckert, D., Kim, D. -J., & Seo, D. (2013). Students’ perceptions and experiences of mobile learning. Language Learning & Technology,
17
(3), 52–73. [URL]
Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2020). Mobile-assisted language learning. In C. A. Chapelle. (Ed.), The concise encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 743–750). Wiley.
Larson-Hall, J. (2016). A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS and R (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Lee, A. H., & Lyster, R. (2016a). The effects of corrective feedback on instructed L2 speech perception. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
38
(1), 35–64.
(2016b). Effects of different types of corrective feedback on receptive skills in a second language: A speech perception training study. Language Learning,
66
(4), 809–833.
Lee, J., Jang, J., & Plonsky, L. (2015). The effectiveness of second language pronunciation instruction: A meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics,
36
(3), 345–366.
Lin, G. Y. (2018). Anonymous versus identified peer assessment via a Facebook-based learning application: Effects on quality of peer feedback, perceived learning, perceived fairness, and attitude toward the system. Computers & Education,
116
1, 81–92.
Lu, R., & Bol, L. (2007). A comparison of anonymous versus identifiable e-peer review on college student writing performance and the extent of critical feedback. Journal of Interactive Online Learning,
6
(2), 100–115. [URL]
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing,
18
(1), 30–43.
Luo, B. (2016). Evaluating a computer-assisted pronunciation training (CAPT) technique for efficient classroom instruction. Computer Assisted Language Learning,
29
(3). 451–476.
MacMahon, M. K. C. (1991). The woman behind ‘Arthur’. Journal of the International Phonetic Association,
21
(1), 29–31.
Martin, I. A., & Sippel, L. (2021a). Is giving better than receiving?: The effects of peer and teacher feedback on L2 pronunciation skills. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation,
7
(1), 62–88.
(2021b). Providing vs. receiving peer feedback: Learners’ beliefs and experiences. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication.
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1995). Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning,
45
(1), 73–97.
Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Routledge.
Piske, T., MacKay, I. R. A., & Flege, J. E. (2001). Factors affecting degree of foreign accent in an L2: A review. Journal of Phonetics,
29
(2), 191–215.
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning,
64
(4), 878–912.
R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Ranta, L., & Lyster, R. (2018). Form-focused instruction. In P. Garrett & J. Cots. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language awareness (pp. 40–56). Routledge.
Roach, P. (2004). British English: Received pronunciation. Journal of the International Phonetic Association,
34
(2), 239–245.
Rouhi, A., & Azizian, E. (2013). Peer review: Is giving corrective feedback better than receiving it in L2 writing? Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences,
93
1, 1349–1354.
Saito, K. (2011). Examining the role of explicit phonetic instruction in native-like and comprehensible pronunciation development: An instructed SLA approach to L2 phonology. Language Awareness,
20
(1), 45–59.
(2013). The acquisitional value of recasts in instructed second language speech learning: Teaching the perception and production of English /ɹ/ to adult Japanese learners. Language Learning,
63
(3), 499–529.
(2021a). Effects of corrective feedback on second language pronunciation development. In H. Nassaji & E. Kartchava. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching (pp. 407–428). Cambridge University Press.
(2021b). What characterizes comprehensible and native-like pronunciation among English-as-a-second-language speakers? Meta-analyses of phonological, rater, and instructional factors. TESOL Quarterly,
55
(3), 866–900.
Saito, K., & Lyster, R. (2012). Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /ɹ/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning,
62
(2), 595–633.
Saito, K., & Wu, X. (2014). Communicative focus on form and second language suprasegmental learning: Teaching Cantonese learners to perceive Mandarin tones. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
36
(4), 647–680.
Saito, K., Sun, H., & Tierney, A. (2019). Explicit and implicit aptitude effects on second language speech learning: Scrutinizing segmental and suprasegmental sensitivity and performance via behavioural and neurophysiological measures. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition,
22
(5), 1123–1140.
Sato, M. (2013). Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of classroom intervention. The Modern Language Journal,
97
(3), 611–633.
(2017). Oral peer corrective feedback: Multiple theoretical perspectives. In H. Nassaji & E. Kartchava. (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications (pp. 19–34). Routledge.
Sato, M., & Ballinger, S. (2016). Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development: Monitoring, practice, and proceduralization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
34
(4), 591–626.
Sharbawi, S. (2012). Revisiting the vowels of Brunei English. World Englishes,
31
(2), 177–197.
Sippel, L. (2019). The impact of peer corrective feedback on vocabulary development. Foreign Language Annals,
52
(3), 595–611.
Sippel, L., & Jackson, C. N. (2015). Teacher vs. peer oral corrective feedback in the German language classroom. Foreign Language Annals,
48
(4), 688–705.
Sippel, L., & Martin, I. A. (2022). Immediate and long-term improvement in lexical stress perception: The role of teacher and peer feedback. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. Advance online publication.
Thomson, R. I., & Derwing, T. M. (2015). The effectiveness of L2 pronunciation instruction: A narrative review. Applied Linguistics,
36
(3), 326–344.
Toth, P. D. (2008). Teacher- and learner-led discourse in task-based grammar instruction: Providing procedural assistance for L2 morphosyntactic development. Language Learning,
58
(2), 237–283.
Trofimovich, P., & Baker, W. (2006). Learning second language suprasegmentals: Effect of L2 experience on prosody and fluency characteristics of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
28
(1), 1–30.
Villamil, O. S., & De Guerrero, M. C. M. (1996). Peer revision in the L2 classroom: Social-cognitive activities, mediating strategies, and aspects of social behavior. Journal of Second Language Writing,
5
(1), 51–75.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Wu, Y. (2019). Review of Chinese English learners’ prosodic acquisition. English Language Teaching,
12
(8), 89–94.
Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing,
15
(3), 179–200.
Yu, S., & Hu, G. (2017). Understanding university students’ peer feedback practices in EFL writing: Insights from a case study. Assessing Writing,
33
1, 25–35.
Zhang, R., & Yuan, Z. M. (2020). Examining the effects of explicit pronunciation instruction on the development of L2 pronunciation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
42
(4), 905–918.
Zhu, Q., & Carless, D. (2018). Dialogue within peer feedback processes: Clarification and negotiation of meaning. Higher Education Research & Development,
37
(4), 883–897.