Chapter published in:
Learning Language through Task Repetition
Edited by Martin Bygate
[Task-Based Language Teaching 11] 2018
► pp. 171–192

Chapter 7
The effects of awareness-raising through stimulated recall on the repeated performance of the same task and on a new task of the same type

| Waseda University, Tokyo
| Curtin University, Perth, Australia | Shanghai International Studies University
The study explores the effects of intervening between the performance of the same task and whether these effects transfer to a new task. 40 Japanese university students completed the same monologic narrative task three times and then performed a new task of the same type (Time 4). 20 students just performed the tasks (the task-repetition group). The other 20 engaged in a stimulated recall procedure after the initial performance of the first task (the stimulated recall group). In both groups, structural complexity increased from Time 1 to Time 2 and was maintained, including in the new task. In contrast, accuracy remained the same for both groups when the same task was repeated and decreased notably in the new task. Fluency improved in both groups when the same task was repeated but declined when the new task was performed. However, performance of the new task was still significantly better than at Time 1. No differences were evident in complexity and accuracy between the task-repetition and the stimulated recall groups over time. The stimulated recall group demonstrated greater fluency than the task-repetition group when repeating the same task but not the new task. The chapter concludes with comments on the potential of stimulated recall as a means for enhancing the effects of task repetition.
Article outline
  • Theoretical issues
  • Previous studies of task repetition
    • Task repetition studies involving intervention
  • Stimulated recall
  • Method
    • Participants
    • Design
    • Instruments
    • Experimental procedure
    • Analysis
  • Results
    • Summary
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 25 September 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.11.07she
References
Adams, R.
(2003) L2 output, reformulation and noticing: Implications for IL development. Language Teaching Research, 7(3), 347–376.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ahmadian, M. J. & Tavakoli, M.
(2011) The effects of simultaneous use of careful online planning and task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency in EFL learners’ oral production. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 35–59.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baddeley, A.
(2007) Working memory, thought, and action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baleghizadeh, S. & Derakhshesh, A.
(2012) The effect of task repetition and noticing on EFL learners’ oral output. International Journal of Instruction, 5(1), 141–152.Google Scholar
Birjandi, P., & Ahangari, S.
(2008) Effects of task repetition on the fluency, complexity and accuracy of Iranian EFL learners’ oral discourse. Asian EFL Journal, 10(3), 28–52.Google Scholar
Bygate, M.
(1996) Effects of task repetition: Appraising the developing language of learners. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 136–146). Oxford: Heinemann.Google Scholar
(2001) Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks, second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23–48). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
(2006) Areas of work that influence L2 speaking instruction. In E. Uso-Juan & A. Martinez-Flor (Eds.), Current trends in the development and teaching of the four language skills (pp. 159–186). Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Jong, N. & Perfetti, C. A.
(2011) Fluency training in the ESL classroom: An experimental study of fluency development and proceduralization. Language Learning, 61(2), 533–568.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Egi, T.
(2007) Interpreting recasts as linguistic evidence: The roles of linguistic target, length, and degree of change. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(4), 511–537.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Investigating stimulated recall as a cognitive measure: Reactivity and verbal reports in SLA research methodology. Language Awareness, 17(3), 212–228.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2005) Planning and task-based research: theory and research. In R. Ellis (Ed.). Planning and task-performance in a second language (pp. 3–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(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
(2015) Understanding second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2003) Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fukuta, J.
(2016) Effects of task repetition on learners’ attention orientation in L2 oral production. Language Teaching Research, 20(3), 321–340.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S., & Mackey. A.
(2000) Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Gass, S., Mackey, A., Alvarez-Torres, M. J., & Fernández-García, M.
(1999) The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, 49(4), 549–581.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Greenhouse, S. W., & Geisser, S.
(1959) On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 24(2), 95–112.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hant, K.
(1966) Recent Measures in syntactic Development. Elementary English, 43(7), pp. 732–739 Google Scholar
Hawkes, M. L.
(2011) Using task repetition to direct learner attention and focus on form. ELT Journal, 66(3), 327–336.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y.
(2013) Promoting attention to form through task repetition in a Korean EFL context. In K. McDonough & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational settings (pp. 3–24). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y., & Tracy-Ventura, N.
(2013) The role of task repetition in L2 performance development: What needs to be repeated during task-based interaction? System, 41(3), 829–840.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W.
1989 Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S.
(1999) A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(1), 1–38.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P.
2008 Transfer appropriate processing as a model for classroom second language acquisition. In Z. Han (Ed.), Understanding second language process (pp. 27–44). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Lindgren, E., & Sullivan, K. P.
(2003) Stimulated recall as a trigger for increasing noticing and language awareness in the L2 writing classroom: A case study of two young female writers. Language Awareness, 12(3–4), 172–186.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lindgren, E. & Sullivan, K.
(2003) Stimulated recall as a trigger for increasing noticing and language awareness in the L2 writing classroom: A case study of two young female writers. Language Awareness, 12, 172–186.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lynch, T., & Maclean, J.
(2000) Exploring the benefits of task repetition and recycling for classroom language learning. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 221–250.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Manchón, R. M.
(2014) The distinctive nature of task repetition in writing. Implications for theory, research, and pedagogy. ELIA, 14, 13–41.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miyake, A., & Shah, P.
(Eds.) (1999) Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nation, P., & Newton, J.
(2009) Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Patanasorn, C.
(2010) Effects of procedural content and task repetition on accuracy and fluency in an EFL context (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Northern Arizona University.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J.
(1985) A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Robinson, P.
(1995) Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45(1), 99–140.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sheppard, C.
(2006) The effects of instruction directed at the gaps second language learners noticed in their oral production (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Auckland.Google Scholar
Skehan, P.
(1998) A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Skehan, P., & Foster, P.
(1999) The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language learning, 49(1), 93–120.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Smagorinsky, P.
(2001) Rethinking protocol analysis from a cultural perspective. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 21, 233–245.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M.
(2006) Verbal protocols: What does it mean for research to use speaking data collection tools. In M. Chalhoub-Deville, C. Chapelle, & P. Duff (Eds.), Inference and generalizability in applied linguistics: Multiple research perspectives (pp. 97–114). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thai, C., & Boers, F.
(2016) Repeating a monologue under increasing time pressure: Effects on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 369–393.CrossrefGoogle 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), 1–27.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 10 other publications

Ellis, Rod
2019.  In Researching L2 Task Performance and Pedagogy [Task-Based Language Teaching, 13], ► pp. 15 ff. Crossref logo
Kartchava, Eva & Hossein Nassaji
2019. The role of task repetition and learner self-assessment in technology-mediated task performance. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 170:2 ► pp. 180 ff. Crossref logo
Khezrlou, Sima
2020. The role of task repetition with direct written corrective feedback in L2 writing complexity, accuracy and fluency. Journal of Second Language Studies 3:1 ► pp. 31 ff. Crossref logo
Khezrlou, Sima
2021. Effects of task repetition with written corrective feedback on the knowledge and written accuracy of learners with different prior knowledge of the structure. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 34:2 ► pp. 464 ff. Crossref logo
Khezrlou, Sima
2021. Effects of timing and availability of isolated FFI on learners’ written accuracy and fluency through task repetition. The Language Learning Journal 49:5 ► pp. 568 ff. Crossref logo
Khezrlou, Sima
2021. Explicit instruction through task repetition: effects on explicit and implicit knowledge development. Language Awareness 30:1 ► pp. 62 ff. Crossref logo
Khezrlou, Sima
2021. Focus on form in task repetition through oral and written task modeling. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 0:0 Crossref logo
Khezrlou, Sima
2022. Effects of task repetition with consciousness-raising in wiki-mediated collaborative writing on the development of explicit and implicit knowledge. Computer Assisted Language Learning ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Souza Ferraz D'Ely, Raquel Carolina, Mailce Borges Mota & Martin Bygate
2019.  In Researching L2 Task Performance and Pedagogy [Task-Based Language Teaching, 13], ► pp. 199 ff. Crossref logo
Sánchez, Alberto J., Rosa M. Manchón & Roger Gilabert
2020.  In Writing and Language Learning [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 56], ► pp. 121 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 march 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.