Article published in:
Aptitude-treatment interaction in second language learning
Edited by Robert M. DeKeyser
[Journal of Second Language Studies 2:2] 2019
► pp. 281–316

Working memory and planning time as predictors of fluency and accuracy

| VOXY
| University of Maryland, College Park
Working memory, which accounts for the ability to process information in the face of interference, is critical to second language acquisition (SLA) and use. The interaction of working memory capacity (WMC) with specific pedagogical interventions is a logical place for empirical SLA research, both to examine the cognitive processes underpinning second language performance and to identify instructional treatments that may serve learners differently based on their WMC. This study considers WMC along with two different types of pre-task planning time (guided and unguided) as predictors of the attempted accuracy and fluency of learners’ discourse. Seventy-two intermediate ESL students from seven classes at a community college participated by completing two different working memory span tasks, as well as two different “There-and-Then” oral story-telling tasks. The treatment condition of the story-telling tasks was manipulated so that learners’ performance could be considered in terms of provision of pre-task planning (+/− planning), type of planning (guided vs. unguided), and order of planning (planning first or planning second). Task order had a clear effect on learners’ production, regardless of the provision of planning time. Guided planning time promoted a focus on attempted accuracy and unguided planning time fostered fluency. Finally, this study indicates that task conditions can affect high- and low-WMC learners in different ways: the former are more likely to comply with complex story-telling instructions, requiring them to focus on grammatical form at the expense of fluency, whereas the latter are less likely to comply with the same instructions.
Keywords: tasks, ESL, planning, working memory capacity, aptitude
Published online: 08 October 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.19004.bro
References

References

Atkins, S. M., Harbison, J. I., Bunting, M. F., Teubner-Rhodes, S., & Dougherty, M. R.
(2009) Measuring working memory with automated block span and automated letter-number sequencing. Poster presented at the 50th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Boston, MA. Crossref
Baddeley, A. & Hitch, G.
(1974) Working memory. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47–90). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Conway, A. R. A., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. W.
(2005) Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(5), 769–786. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, N.
(1999) An embedded-processes model of working memory. In A. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 62–101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 311 ]
Crookes, G.
(1989) Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 367–383. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Daneman, M. & Carpenter, P.
(1980) Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Daneman, M. & Green, I.
(1986) Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(1), 1–18. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M.
(2009) Cognitive-psychological processes in second language learning. In. M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 119–138). Malden, MA: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. & Koeth, J.
(2011) Cognitive aptitudes for second language learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. 2, pp. 395–406). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2009) The differential effects of three types of task planning on the fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 474–509. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Language teaching research and language pedagogy. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Engle, R. W., Kane, M. J., & Tuholski, S. W.
(1999) Individual differences in WMC and what they tell us about controlled attention, general fluid intelligence, and functions of the prefrontal cortex. In A. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 102–134). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Engle, R. W.
(2010) Role of working memory capacity in cognitive control. Current Anthropology, 51(s1), 17–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gilabert, R.
(2007a) The simultaneous manipulation of task complexity along planning time and (+/− Here and Now): Effects on L2 oral production. In M. Garcia-Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 44–68). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(2007b) Effects of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 oral production. IRAL, 45, 215–240. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gilabert, R., & Muñoz, C.
(2010) Differences in attainment and performance of a second language: The role of WMC. International Journal of English Studies, 10(1), 19–42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Guará-Tavares, M. G.
(2009) The relationship among pre-task planning, working memory capacity, and L2 speech performance: A pilot study. Linguagem & Ensino, 12(1), 165–194.Google Scholar
Harrington, M., & Sawyer, M.
(1992) L2 WMC and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 25–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A., & Harrington, M.
(2011) Aspects of working memory in L2 learning. Language Teaching: Reviews and Studies, 42(2), 137–166. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kane, M. J., Bleckley, M. K., Conway, A. R. A., & Engle, R. W.
(2001) A controlled-attention view of working memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 169–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 312 ]
Kane, M. J., Conway, A. R. A., Hambrick, D. Z., & Engle, R. W.
(2007) Variation in WMC as variation in executive attention & control. In A. R. A. Conway, C. Jarrold, M. J. Kane, A. Miyake & J. N. Towse (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 21–48). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kawauchi, C.
(2005) The effects of strategic planning on the oral narratives of learners with low and high intermediate proficiency. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 143–164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kormos, J., & Sáfár, A.
(2008) Phonological short-term memory, working memory and foreign language performance in intensive language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(2), 261–271. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kormos, J. & Trebits, A.
(2011) Working memory capacity and narrative task performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 267–286). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Linck, J. A., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. T., & Bunting, M. F.
(2014) Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 861–883. CrossrefGoogle 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.) Individual differences and instructed second language learning (pp. 181–209). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mehnert, U.
(1998) The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 52–83. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mochizuki, N., & Ortega, L.
(2008) Balancing communication and grammar in beginning‐level foreign language classrooms: A study of guided planning and relativization. Language Teaching Research, 12(1), 11‐37. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nielson, K.
(2014) Can planning time compensate for individual differences in working memory capacity? Language Teaching Research, 18(3), 272–293. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ortega, L.
(1999) Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 109–148. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) What do learners plan? Learner-driven attention to form during pre-task planning. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 77–109). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Park, S.
(2010) The influence of pretask instructions and pretask planning on focus on form during Korean EFL task-based interaction. Language Teaching Research, 14(1), 9–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Payne, J. & Ross, B.
(2005) Synchronous CMC, working memory, and L2 proficiency development. Language Learning and Technology, 19(3), 35–54.Google Scholar
Payne, J. & Whitney, P.
(2002) Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: Output, working memory, and interlanguage development. CALICO Journal, 20, 7–32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rai, M. K., Loschky, L. C., Harris, R. J., Peck, N. R. & Cook, L. G.
(2011) Effects of stress and working memory capacity on foreign language readers’ inferential processing during comprehension. Language Learning, Language Learning, 61(1), 187–218. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 313 ]
Robinson, P.
(1995a) Attention, memory, and the “noticing” hypothesis. Language Learning, 45(2), 281–331. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1995b) Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45(1), 99–140. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2001) Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for investigating task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2002) Effects of individual differences in intelligence, aptitude and working memory on adult incidental SLA. In P. Robinson. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 211–266). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005a) Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 46–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005b) Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 1–32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2007) Aptitudes, abilities, contexts, and practice. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in a second language. Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 256–286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011) Second language task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis, language learning, and performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 3–38). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sangarun, J.
(2005) The effects of focusing on meaning and form in strategic planning. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 111–141). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P.
(1998) A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2002) Theorising and updating aptitude. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed second language learning (pp. 69–93). Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, flueny, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510–532. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P. & P. Foster
(1997) Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 1(3), 185–211. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P., & Foster, P.
(1999) The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49, 93–120. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P. & Foster, P.
(2001) Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183–205). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sprenger, A. M., Atkins, S. M., Colflesh, G. J. H., Briner, T. L., Buchanan, J. B., Chavis, S. E., Chen, S., Iannuzzi, G. L., Kashtelyan, V., Dowling, E., Bolger, D. J., Bunting, M. F., & Dougherty, M. R.
in preparation). A four-dimensional video game for measuring cognitive ability.
Sunderman, G. & Kroll, J.
(2009) When study-abroad experience fails to deliver: The internal resources threshold effect. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 70–99. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 314 ]
Unsworth, N. & Engle, R.
(2007) The nature of individual differences in working memory capacity: Active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search from secondary memory. Psychological Review, 114, 104–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wigglesworth, G.
(1997) An investigation of planning time and proficiency level on oral test discourse. Language Testing, 14(1), 85–106.Google Scholar
Williams, J.
(2011) Working memory and SLA. In S. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 427–441). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Yuan, F., & Ellis, R.
(2003) The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24, 1–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Sadeghi, Michael & Mostafa Pourhaji
2021. The contributions of working memory and pre-task explicit instruction to L2 oral performance. System 96 ► pp. 102409 ff. Crossref logo
Suzuki, Yuichi
2021. Individual differences in memory predict changes in breakdown and repair fluency but not speed fluency: A short-term fluency training intervention study. Applied Psycholinguistics 42:4 ► pp. 969 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 august 2021. 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.