Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT) research has provided ample evidence that cognitive complexity is an important aspect of task design that influences learner performance in terms of fluency, accuracy, and syntactic and lexical complexity. Task features such as the degree of structure and storyline complexity contribute to task complexity and affect different aspects of L2 performance. Two of the current models of task complexity (i.e. Skehan 1998, and Robinson 2001), have further encapsulated different dimensions of task complexity and have provided both a framework for evaluating and predicting task complexity and a detailed discussion of the factors that may affect cognitive complexity. These models by principle are assumed to be pertinent to all tasks regardless of their purpose, type, or mode. However, little is known about whether cognitive complexity affects writing and speaking tasks in similar ways, or whether it has similar influences on L2 oral and written performance. By replicating previous research in oral task performance (Tavakoli & Foster 2008), the current study investigates the effects of storyline complexity on L2 learners writing in narrative tasks. The findings indicate that, although cognitive complexity affects both written and spoken performances, the way it affects the syntactic complexity of writing and speaking differs to some extent. In addition to presenting empirical data that provides insights into the effects of cognitive complexity on L2 learners’ writing and speaking, the main contribution of the chapter is to help extend our understanding of how task complexity plays out with the syntactic complexity of L2 performance in the two different modes, and to allow for a more in-depth understanding of the ways in which task complexity contributes to L2 writing. In that fashion, the findings of the current study can also begin to answer the question of whether or not a single model of task complexity can account for both writing and speaking tasks.
(1992) Oxford Placement Test 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Coughlan, P., & Duff, P
(1994) Same task, different activities: Analysis of a SLA task from an activity theory perspective. In J. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 173–194). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
(2000) Sociocultural contributions to understanding the foreign and second language classroom. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 27–51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(1987) Interlanguage variability in narrative discourse: Style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 12–20.
(2003) Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(1980) The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In L.W. Gregg & E.R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 31–50). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
(2001) Rules and routines: A consideration of their role in the task-based language production of native and non-native speakers. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 75–95). London: Longman.
Foster, P., & Skehan, P
(1996) The influence of planning and task type on second language performances. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299–323.
Foster, P., & Tavakoli, P
(2009) Native speakers and task performance: Comparing effects on complexity, fluency and lexical diversity. Language Learning, 59, 866–896.
(2007) Effects of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 production. IRAL, 45, 215–240.
(2006) The effects of manipulating task complexity along the ( ± Here-and-Now) dimension on L2 written narrative discourse. In C.M. García Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 136–156). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
(1996) A model of working memory in writing. In C.M. Levy & S. Randsell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 57–72). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
(2005) Speech production and second language acquisition. London: Routledge.
(2011) Task complexity and linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20, 215–240.
Kormos, J., & Trebits, A
(2012) The role of task complexity, modality and aptitude in narrative task performance. Language Learning, 62, 439–472.
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I
(2007) Task complexity and measures of linguistic performance in L2 writing. IRAL, 45, 261–284.
(1989) Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
(1986) Language and content. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Norris, J., & Ortega, L
(2009) Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30, 555–577.
(1989) Designing communicative tasks for language classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ong, J., & Zhang, L
(2010) Effects of task complexity on the fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students' argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19, 218–233.
Pawley, A., & Syder, F
(1983) Two puzzles for linguistic theory: native-like selection and native-like fluency. In J. Richards & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191–226). London, Longman.
Platt, E., & Brooks, F
(1994) The “acquisition-rich environment” revisited. Modern Language Journal, 78, 497–511.
(1997) Task condition, task complexity and variation in oral L2 discourse. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
(1995) Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45, 99–140.
(2001) 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: Cambridge University Press.
(2007) Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects of L2 speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task complexity. IRAL, 45, 193–213.
2020. Differential Effects of Strategic Planning and Task Structure on L2 Writing Outcomes. Reading & Writing Quarterly 36:4 ► pp. 320 ff.
2021. A learner corpus analysis: Effects of task complexity, task type, and L1 & L2 similarity on propositional and linguistic complexity
. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 59:4 ► pp. 569 ff.
2016. The differential effects of two types of task repetition on the complexity, accuracy, and fluency in computer-mediated L2 written production: a focus on computer anxiety. Computer Assisted Language Learning 29:5 ► pp. 1052 ff.
Gomez Laich, Maria Pia & Naoko Taguchi
2021. Effects of task complexity on the learning of genre specific rhetorical moves and linguistic forms: the case of contrast and argumentative essays. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 0:0
2019. Effects of increasing the degree of reasoning and the number of elements on L2 argumentative writing. Language Teaching Research 23:5 ► pp. 633 ff.
2022. The role of modality and working memory capacity in L2 production. Language Teaching Research► pp. 136216882211352 ff.
2022. Collaborative writing in an EFL secondary setting: the role of task complexity. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 0:0
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 may 2023. 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.