Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:35:41.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Contributions of declarative and procedural memory to accuracy and automatization during second language practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2019

Diana Pili-Moss ,
Katherine A. Brill-Schuetz ,
Mandy Faretta-Stutenberg  and
Kara Morgan-Short Open the ORCID record for Kara Morgan-Short [Opens in a new window]
Diana Pili-Moss*
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics and English Language, University of Lancaster
Katherine A. Brill-Schuetz
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago
Mandy Faretta-Stutenberg
Affiliation:
Department of World Languages and Cultures, Northern Illinois University
Kara Morgan-Short
Affiliation:
Department of Hispanic and Italian Studies, and Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago
*
Address for correspondence: Diana Pili-Moss, E-mail: d.pilimoss@lancaster.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Extending previous research that has examined the relationship between long-term memory and second language (L2) development with a primary focus on accuracy in L2 outcomes, the current study explores the relationship between declarative and procedural memory and accuracy and automatization during L2 practice. Adult English native speakers had learned an artificial language over two weeks (Morgan-Short, Faretta-Stutenberg, Brill-Schuetz, Carpenter & Wong, 2014), producing four sessions of practice data that had not been analyzed previously. Mixed-effects models analyses revealed that declarative memory was positively related to accuracy during comprehension practice. No other relationships were evidenced for accuracy. For automatization, measured by the coefficient of variation (Segalowitz, 2010), the model revealed a positive relationship with procedural memory that became stronger over practice for learners with higher declarative memory but weaker for learners with lower declarative memory. These results provide further insight into the role that long-term memory plays during L2 development.

Keywords

declarative memoryprocedural memoryL2 individual differencesL2 practiceL2 automatization
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , May 2020 , pp. 639 - 651
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akamatsu, N (2008) The effects of training on automatization of word recognition in English as a foreign language. Applied Psycholinguistics 29, 175–193. doi:10.1017/S0142716408080089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, JR (1993) Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Anderson, JR (2007) How can the human mind occur in the physical universe? New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195324259.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antoniou, M, Ettlinger, M and Wong, PCM (2016) Complexity, training paradigm design, and the contribution of memory subsystems to grammar learning. PLOS One 11, e0158812. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0158812CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ashby, FG and Crossley, MJ (2012) Automaticity and multiple memory systems. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 3, 363–376. doi:10.1002/wcs.1172Google ScholarPubMed
Bates, D, Machler, M and Bolker, B (2011) lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using s4 classes. http://cran.R-project.org/package=lme4.Google Scholar
Barr, D.J., Levy, R, Scheepers, C and Tily, HJ (2013) Random effect structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68, 255–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brill-Schuetz, KA and Morgan-Short, K (2014) The role of procedural memory in adult second language acquisition. Proceedings of the 36th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 260–265.Google Scholar
Buffington, J & Morgan-Short, K (2019) Declarative and Procedural Memory as Individual Differences in Second Language Aptitude. In Wen, Z, Skehan, P, Biedroń, A, Li &, SSparks, R (eds), Language aptitude: Advancing theory, testing, research and practice. New York: Routledge, pp. 215–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cabeza, R and Moscovitch, M (2013) Memory systems, processing modes, and components: Functional neuroimaging evidence. Perspectives on Psychological Science 8, 49–55. doi:10.1177/1745691612469033CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carpenter, HS (2008) A behavioral and electrophysiological investigation of different aptitudes for L2 grammar in learners equated for proficiency level. Ph.D. dissertation. Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Carroll, JB and Sapon, SM (1959) Modern Language Aptitude Test. New York: The Psychological Corporation/Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
De Jong, N (2005) Can second language learning be learned through listening?: An experimental study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27, 205–234. doi:10.1017/S0272263105050114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, RM (1995) Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 17, 379–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, RM (1997) Beyond explicit rule learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19, 195–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R (2007) Skill acquisition theory. In VanPatten, B & Williams, J (eds), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 97–113.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, RM (2015) Skill acquisition theory. In VanPatten, B and Williams, J (eds), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 94–112.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, RM and Sokalski, KJ (2001) The differential role of comprehension and production practice. Language Learning 51, 81–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eichenbaum, H (2008) Learning & Memory. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google ScholarPubMed
Eichenbaum, H (2011) The cognitive neuroscience of memory: An introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, NC (2005) At the interface: Dynamic interaction of explicit and implicit knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27, 305–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ettlinger, M, Bradlow, AR and Wong, PCM (2014) Variability in the learning of complex morphophonology. Applied Psycholinguistics 35, 807–831. doi:10.1017/S0142716412000586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faraway, JJ (2016) Extending the linear model with R: Generalized linear, mixed effects and nonparametric regression models. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Faretta-Stutenberg, M and Morgan-Short, K (2018) The interplay of individual differences and context of learning in behavioral and neurocognitive second language development. Second Language Research 34, 67–101. doi:10.1177/0267658316684903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferman, S, Olshtain, E, Schechtman, E and Karni, A (2009) The acquisition of a linguistic skill by adults: Procedural and declarative memory interact in the learning of an artificial morphological rule. Journal of Neurolinguistics 22, 384–412. doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2008.12.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foerde, K, Knowlton, BJ and Poldrack, R (2006) Modulation of competing memory systems by distraction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103, 11778–11783.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friederici, AD, Steinhauer, K and Pfeifer, E (2002) Brain signatures of artificial language processing: Evidence challenging the critical period hypothesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99, 529–534.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamrick, P (2015) Declarative and procedural memory abilities as individual differences in incidental language learning. Learning and Individual Differences 44, 9–15. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2015.10.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamrick, P, Lum, JAG and Ullman, MT (2018) Child first language and adult second language are both tied to general-purpose learning systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, 1487–1492. doi:org/10.1073/pnas.1713975115CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henke, K (2010) A model for memory systems based on processing modes rather than consciousness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 11, 523–532. doi:10.1038/nrn2850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, JH, Van Gelderen, A and Schoonen, R (2009) Automatization in second language acquisition: What does the coefficient of variation tell us? Applied Psycholinguistics 30, 555-–82. doi:10.1017/S0142716409990014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Izumi, S (2003) Comprehension and production processes in second language learning: In search of the psycholinguistic rationale of the Output Hypothesis. Applied Linguistics 24, 168–196. doi:10.1093/applin/24.2.168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaller, CP, Rahm, B, Köstering, L and Unterrainer, JM (2011) Reviewing the impact of problem structure on planning: A software tool for analyzing tower tasks. Behavioural Brain Research 216, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaller, CP, Unterrainer, JM and Stahl, C (2012) Assessing planning ability with the Tower of London task: Psychometric properties of a structurally balanced problem set. Psychological Assessment 24, 46–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, AS and Kaufman, NL (2004) The Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Adult Version, Second Edition (K-BIT-2) (2nd edn.) Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Lim, H and Godfroid, A (2015) Automatization in second language sentence processing: A partial, conceptual replication of Hulstijn, Van Gelderen, and Schoonen's 2009 study. Applied Psycholinguistics 36, 1247–1282. doi:10.1017/S0142716414000137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, D, Yu, X and Zhang, H (2017) Word-Level and Sentence-Level Automaticity in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Learners: A Comparative Study. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 46, 1471–1483. doi:10.1007/s10936-017-9509-8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan-Short, K (2007) A neurolinguistic investigation of late- learned second language knowledge: The effects of explicit and implicit conditions. Ph.D. dissertation, Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Morgan-Short, K, Deng, Z, Brill-Schuetz, KA, Faretta-Stutenberg, M, Wong, P and Wong, FCK (2015) A view of the neural representation of second language syntax through artificial language learning under implicit contexts of exposure. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 37, 383–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan-Short, K, Faretta-Stutenberg, M, Brill-Schuetz, K, Carpenter, H and Wong, PCM (2014) Declarative and procedural memory as individual differences in second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 17, 56–72. doi:10.1017/S1366728912000715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan-Short, K, Finger, I, Grey, S and Ullman, MT (2012) Second language processing shows increased native-like neural responses after months of no exposure. PLOS One 7, e32974. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0032974CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan-Short, K, Sanz, C, Steinhauer, K and Ullman, MT (2010) Second language acquisition of gender agreement in explicit and implicit training conditions: An event- related potential study. Language Learning 60, 154–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan-Short, K, Steinhauer, K, Sanz, C and Ullman, MT (2012) Explicit and implicit second language training differentially affect the achievement of native-like brain activation patterns. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 24, 933–947.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norris, JM and Ortega, L (2000) Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning 50, 417–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Packard, MG and Goodman, J (2013) Factors that influence the relative use of multiple memory systems. Hippocampus 23, 1044–1052. doi:10.1002/hipo.22178CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paradis, M (2009) Declarative and procedural determinants of second languages. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, NA, Segalowitz, N, O'Brien, I and Yamasaki, N (2004) Semantic priming in a first and second language: evidence from reaction time variability and event-related brain potentials. Journal of Neurolinguistics 17, 237–262. doi:10.1016/S0911-6044(03)00055-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pili-Moss, D (2018) The earliest stages of second language learning: A behavioral investigation of long-term memory and age. Ph.D. dissertation, Lancaster University. www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/files/260180551/PhD_Diana_Pili_Moss_registry.pdf (retrieved June 1st, 2019)Google Scholar
Plonsky, L and Ghanbar, H (2018) Multiple regression in L2 research: A methodological synthesis and guide to interpreting R 2 values. The Modern Language Journal.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L and Oswald, FL (2014) How big is ‘big’? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning 64, 878–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team (2018) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N (2003) Automaticity and second language learning. In Doughty, C & Long, M (eds), The handbook of second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 382–408. doi:10.1002/9780470756492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N (2010) Cognitive bases of second language fluency. Routledge: New York/London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, NS (2013) Automaticity. In Robinson, P (ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition. London: Routledge, pp. 53–57.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, NS and Segalowitz, SJ (1993) Skilled performance, practice, and the differentiation of speed-up from automatization effects: Evidence from second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics 14, 369–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, SJ, Segalowitz, NS and Wood, AG (1998) Assessing the development of automaticity in second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics 19, 53–67. doi:10.1017/S0142716400010572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N, Trofimovich, P, Gatbonton, E and Sokolovskaya, A (2008) Feeling affect in a second language: The role of word recognition automaticity. The Mental Lexicon 3, 47–71.Google Scholar
Squire, LR (2004) Memory systems of the brain: A brief history and current perspective. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory 82, 171–177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Squire, LR and Dede, A. J. O. (2015) Conscious and unconscious memory systems. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology 7(a021667) doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a021667Google Scholar
Squire, LR and Wixted, JT (2011) The cognitive neuroscience of human memory since HM. Annual Review of Neuroscience 34. doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-061010- 113720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Y (2017) The role of procedural learning ability in automatization of L2 morphology under different learning schedules [First view online publication]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, doi:10.1017/S0272263117000249. Published online by Cambridge University Press, August 10, 2017.Google Scholar
Suzuki, Y and Sunada, M (2018) Automatization in second language sentence processing: Relationship between elicited imitation and maze tasks. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 21, 32–46. doi:10.1017/S1366728916000857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trahan, DE and Larrabee, GJ (1988) Continuous Visual Memory Test. Odessa, FL: Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Ullman, MT (2004) Contributions of memory circuits to language: The declarative/procedural model. Cognition 92, 231–270. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.008CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ullman, MT (2015) The declarative/procedural model: A neurobiologically-motivated theory of first and second language. In VanPatten, B and Williams, J (eds), Theories of second language acquisition: An introduction. Mahwah: NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 135–158.Google Scholar
Ullman, MT (2016) The declarative/procedural model: A neurobiological model of language learning, knowledge and use. In Hickok, G and Small, SA (eds), The neurobiology of language. Elsevier, pp. 953–968. doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407794-2.00092-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unterrainer, JM, Rahm, B, Leonhart, R, Ruff, CC and Halsband, U (2003) The Tower of London: The impact of instructions, cueing, and learning on planning abilities.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Pili-Moss et al. supplementary material

Pili-Moss et al. supplementary material

Download Pili-Moss et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 292.8 KB