Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:55:44.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ATTENTION WHEN?: An Investigation of the Ordering Effect of Input and Interaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2005

Susan M. Gass  and
María José Alvarez Torres
Susan M. Gass
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
María José Alvarez Torres
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper investigates the effects of input and interaction as separate entities and in combination. We further investigate these effects as a function of different language areas. One hundred two learners of L2 Spanish were provided with input on (a) Spanish gender agreement (noun + adjective), (b) estar + location, and (c) seven vocabulary items. There were four conditions: (a) material focused solely on input, (b) material focused solely on interaction, (c) input-focused material followed by interaction, and (d) interaction-focused material followed by input. A control group completed a pretest and posttest. In general, greatest improvement from pretest to posttest for all conditions was noted for vocabulary. Learners exposed to input and interaction in combination showed greater improvement than those in conditions with only input or only interaction. In the two grammatical areas (gender agreement and estar + location), learners who received interaction followed by input showed greatest improvement. We consider issues such as complexity and abstractness to account for the findings of differential effects on language areas.Funding for this project was provided by a federal grant from the U.S. Department of Education to the Center for Language Education and Research at Michigan State University (P229A990012 and P229A020001). We would like to thank George Sirbu and Pingping Ni for help with the statistics of this study. We are also grateful to the anonymous SSLA reviewers for helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper. All errors remain our own.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , March 2005 , pp. 1 - 31
Copyright
© 2005 Cambridge University Press

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

REFERENCES

Anderson, J. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1987). Markedness and salience in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 37, 385–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. D. (2001). Using surveys in language programs. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cheng, A. (2002). The effects of processing instruction on the acquisition of ser and estar. Hispania, 85, 308–323.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (1995). Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 379–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R., Salaberry, R., Robinson, P., & Harrington, M. (2002). What gets processed in processing instruction? A commentary on Bill VanPatten's “Update.” Language Learning, 52, 805–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 143–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández-García, M. (1999). Patterns of gender agreement in the speech of second language learners. In J. Gutiérrez-Rexach & F. Martínez-Gil (Eds.), Advances in Hispanic linguistics: Papers from the 2nd Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp. 3–15). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Gass, S. (1988). Integrating research areas: A framework for second language studies. Applied Linguistics, 9, 92–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. (1994). The reliability of L2 grammaticality judgments. In E. Tarone, S. Gass, & A. Cohen (Eds.), Research methodology in second language acquisition (pp. 303–322). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2002). Frequency effects and second language acquisition: A complex picture? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 249–260.Google Scholar
Gass, S., Svetics, I., & Lemelin, S. (2003). Differential effects of attention. Language Learning, 53, 495–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geeslin, K. (2001). Changing norms, moving targets, and the SLA of copula choice. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 5, 29–55.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K. (2002a). The second language acquisition of copula choice and its relationship to language change. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 419–451.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K. (2002b). Semantic transparency as a predictor of copula choice in second language acquisition. Linguistics, 40, 439–468.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K. (2003). A comparison of copula choice: Native Spanish speakers and advanced learners. Language Learning, 53, 703–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gopher, D. (1992). Analysis and measurement of mental workload. In G. d'Ydewalle, P. Eelen, & P. Bertelson (Eds.), International perspectives on psychological science: Vol. 2. State of the art (pp. 265–291). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gunterman, G. (1992). An analysis of interlanguage development over time: Part 2. Ser and estar. Hispania, 75, 1294–1303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harley, B. (1998). The role of form-focused tasks in promoting the second language acquisition of children in Grade 2. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 156–174). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hulstijn, J., & de Graaff, R. (1994). Under what conditions does explicit knowledge of a second language facilitate the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A research proposal. AILA Review, 11, 57–68.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kihlstrom, J. (1987). The cognitive unconscious. Science, 237, 1445–1452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 557–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design (in press). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). Do learners recognize implicit negative feedback as feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 471–497.Google Scholar
Riggenbach, H., & Samuda, V. (1997). Grammar dimensions: Form, meaning, and use—Book Two. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Robinson, P. (2003). Attention and memory during SLA. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 631–678). Oxford: Blackwell.
Rogers, M. (1987). Learners' difficulties with grammatical gender in German as a foreign language. Applied Linguistics, 8, 48–74.Google Scholar
Ryan, J., & Lafford, B. (1992). The acquisition of lexical meaning in a study abroad environment: Ser + estar and the Granada experience. Hispania, 75, 714–722.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 13, 206–226.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1992). Psychological mechanisms underlying second language fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 357–385.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1993). Consciousness, learning, and interlanguage pragmatics. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 21–42). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schmidt, R. (1994). Implicit learning and the cognitive unconscious: Of artificial grammars and SLA. In N. C. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 165–209). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1–63). Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schwartz, B. D. (1993). On explicit and negative data effecting and affecting competence and linguistic behavior. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 147–163.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165–179.Google Scholar
Trahey, M., & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and preemption in the second language classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 181–204.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1987). Classroom learners' acquisition of ser and estar: Accounting for developmental stages. In B. VanPatten, T. Dvorak, & J. F. Lee (Eds.), Foreign language learning: A research perspective (pp. 61–75). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to content and form in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287–301.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1994). Evaluating the role of consciousness in second language acquisition: Terms, linguistic features, and research methodology. AILA Review, 11, 27–36.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction. Westport, CT: Ablex.
VanPatten, B. (2002). Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning, 52, 755–803.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 225–243.Google Scholar
Wickens, C. (1989). Attention and skilled performance. In D. Holding (Ed.), Human skills (pp. 71–105). New York: Wiley.