Article published in:
Processing Perspectives on Task Performance
Edited by Peter Skehan
[Task-Based Language Teaching 5] 2014
► pp. 155186
Brown, G., Anderson, A., Shilcock, R., & Yule, G
(1984) Teaching talk: Strategies for production and assessment. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Bygate, M
(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
Ellis R
(2003), Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: OUP.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, 474–509. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Foster, P., & Skehan, P
(1996) The influence of planning on performance in task-based learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299–324. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1999) The influence of source of planning and focus of planning on task-based performance. Language Teaching Research, 3, 185–214. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2013) Anticipating a post-task activity: The effects on accuracy, complexity and fluency of L2 language performance. Canadian Modern Language Review 69, 3, 249–273. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Foster, P., & Tavakoli, P
(2009) Native speakers and task performance: Comparing effects on complexity, fluency and lexical diversity. Language Learning, 59(4), 886–896. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011) Task design and second language performance: The effect of narrative type on learner output. Language Learning, 61(suppl.1), 37–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Foster, P., Tonkyn, A., & Wigglesworth, J
(2000) Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 354−75. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gilabert, R
(2007) Effects of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 oral production. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 215–240. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hinkel, E
(2004) TOEFL test strategies with Practice Tests (3rd ed.) Hauppauge, NY: Barron’s.Google Scholar
Housen, A., & Kuiken, F
(2009) Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 461–473. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ishikawa, T
(2006) The effects of task complexity and language proficiency on task- based language performance. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 3(4), 193–225.Google Scholar
Iwashita, N., McNamara, T., & Elder, C
(2001) Can we predict task difficulty in an oral proficiency test? Exploring the potential of an information-processing approach to task design. Language Learning, 51(3), 401–436. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kormos, J
(2006) Speech production and second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I
(2007) Task complexity and measures of linguistic performance in L2 writing. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45(3), 261–284. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Cognitive task complexity and written output in Italian and French as a foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 48–60. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W.J.M
(1989) Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B
(2000) The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Malvern, D., & Richards, B
(2002) Investigating accommodation in language proficiency interviews using a new measure of lexical diversity. Language Testing, 19, 85–104. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meara, P., & Bell, H
(2001) P_Lex: A simple and effective way of describing the lexical characteristics of short L2 texts. Prospect, 16, 5–19.Google Scholar
Michel, M., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I
(2007) the influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch L2. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 241–259. 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
Rahimpour, M
(1997) Task complexity, task condition, and variation in L2 oral discourse. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. University of Queensland, Australia.Google Scholar
Richards, B.J., & Malvern, D.D
(1998) A new research tool: Mathematical modelling in the measurement of vocabulary diversity (Award reference no. R000221995). Final Report to the Economic and Social Research Council, Swindon, UK.Google Scholar
Robinson, P
(1995) Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45, 99–140. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2001a) Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 27–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2001b) Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2007) Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on L2 speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 193–214.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011).Task-based language learning: A review of issues. Language Learning, 61(Suppl. 1, June 2011), 1–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R
(2007) Task complexity, the cognition hypothesis and second language learning and performance. IRAL, 45, 161–176.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sawaki, Y., Stricker, L.J., & Oranje, A.H
(2009) Factor structure of an internet-based test. Language Testing, 26(1), 5–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P
(2009a) Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510–532. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009b) Lexical performance by native and non-native speakers on language-learning tasks. In H. Daller, D. Malvern, P. Meara, J. Milton, B. Richards, & J. Treffers-Daller. (Eds.), Vocabulary studies in first and second language acquisition: The interface between theory and application (pp. 107–124). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009c) Models of speaking and the assessment of second language proficiency. In A. Benati. (Ed.), Issues in second language proficiency (pp. 202–215). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
(2011) Researching tasks: Performance, assessment, pedagogy. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.Google Scholar
manuscript). Conventions for coding complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis: The use of TaskProfile. The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P
(1997) The influence of planning and post-task activities on accuracy and complexity in task-based learning. Language Teaching Research, 1(3), 16–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008).Complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis in task-based performance: A meta-analysis of the Ealing research. In S. Van Daele, A. Housen, F. Kuiken, M. Pierrard, & I. Vedder. (Eds.), Complexity, accuracy and fluency in second language use, learning and teaching (pp. 263–284). Brussels: Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and Arts.Google Scholar
Tavakoli, P., & Foster, P
(2008) Task design and second language performance: The effect of narrative type on learner output. Language Learning, 58(2), 439–473. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tavakoli, P., & Skehan, P
(2005) Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 239–276). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van den Branden K
(2006) Task-based language education: From theory to practice. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van den Branden, K., Bygate M., & Norris, J
(2009) (Eds.), Task-based language teaching: A reader. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Z
(2009) Modeling L2 speech production and performance: Evidence from five types of planning and two task structure. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. The Chinese University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Yuan, F., & Ellis, R
(2003). The effects of pre-task planning and online planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 monologicoral production. Applied Linguistics, 24, 1–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 8 other publications

Albarqi, Ghadah & Parvaneh Tavakoli
2022. The effects of proficiency level and dual-task condition on L2 self-monitoring behavior. Studies in Second Language Acquisition  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Awwad, Anas & Parvaneh Tavakoli
2022. Task complexity, language proficiency and working memory: Interaction effects on second language speech performance . International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 60:2  pp. 169 ff. Crossref logo
Michel, Marije C., Andrea Révész, Danni Shi & Yanmei Li
2019.  In Researching L2 Task Performance and Pedagogy [Task-Based Language Teaching, 13],  pp. 133 ff. Crossref logo
Skehan, Peter
2016.  In Becoming and Being an Applied Linguist,  pp. 89 ff. Crossref logo
Skehan, Peter
2016. Tasks Versus Conditions: Two Perspectives on Task Research and Their Implications for Pedagogy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 36  pp. 34 ff. Crossref logo
Skehan, Peter
2022.  In Second Language Acquisition Theory [Bilingual Processing and Acquisition, 14],  pp. 211 ff. Crossref logo
Wang, Qiong & Shaofeng Li
2019.  In Researching L2 Task Performance and Pedagogy [Task-Based Language Teaching, 13],  pp. 67 ff. Crossref logo
Xing, Jiaxin & Shaoqian Luo
2019.  In Researching L2 Task Performance and Pedagogy [Task-Based Language Teaching, 13],  pp. 153 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 september 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.