Cover not available
Part of
Cognitive Individual Differences in Second Language Processing and Acquisition
Edited by Gisela Granena, Daniel O. Jackson and Yucel Yilmaz
[Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 3] 2016
► pp. 279–302

Corrective feedback and working memory capacity

A replication

 | Gwangju National University of Education
The present study, as a conceptual replication of Goo (2012), is designed to compare recasts with metalinguistic feedback in terms of the development of the English that-trace filter and explore the role of working memory (WM) in the extent to which L2 learners benefit from the two feedback moves. Eighty-three Korean EFL learners were recruited and randomly assigned to one of three groups: recast (n = 24), metalinguistic (n = 27), and control (n = 32). Each learner carried out a series of tasks and tests: a WM span task (operation span), a dyadic intensive treatment task, oral production tests, and grammaticality judgment tests (GJTs). Results showed that metalinguistic feedback was more effective than recasts at facilitating accuracy in oral production involving the English that-trace filter, but not on the GJT measure, and that WM was not found to have mediated the effectiveness of either feedback move.
Article outline
  • 1.Background
  • 2.Present study
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Linguistic Target
    • 3.3Design
    • 3.4Tasks and materials
      • 3.4.1Treatment task
      • 3.4.2Operation span task (OSPAN)
    • 3.4.3Oral production test
    • 3.4.4Grammaticality judgment test (GJT)
    • 3.5Procedure
    • 3.6Scoring
      • 3.6.1OSPAN
    • 3.6.2Oral production/grammaticality judgment
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Grammaticality judgment
    • 4.2Oral production
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • References
Published online: 23 December 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.3.13goo
References (87)
References
Ammar, A. (2008). Prompts and recasts: Differential effects on second language morphosyntax. Language Teaching Research, 12, 183–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543–574. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baddeley, A. D. (2007). Working memory, thought, and action. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bao, M., Egi, T., & Han, Y. (2011). Classroom study on noticing and recast features: Capturing learner noticing with uptake and stimulated recall. System, 39, 215–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braidi, S. M. (2002). Reexamining the role of recasts in native-speaker/nonnative-speaker interactions.Language Learning, 52, 1–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bunting, M. F., Conway, A. R. A., & Heitz, R. P. (2004). Individual differences in the fan effect and working memory capacity. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 604–622. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, H., Jeon, S., MacGregor, & Mackey, A. (2006). Learners’ interpretations of recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 209–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conway, A. R. A., Cowan, N., Bunting, M. F., Therriault, D. J., & Minkoff, S. R. B. (2002). A latent variable analysis of working memory capacity, short-term memory capacity, processing speed, and general fluid intelligence. Intelligence, 30, 163–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conway, A. R. A., Jarrold, C., Kane, M. J., Miyake, A., & Towse, J. N. (Eds.). (2007a). Variation in working memory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2007b). Variation in working memory: An introduction. In A. R. A. Conway, C. Jarrold, M. J. Kane, A. Miyake, & J. N. Towse (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 3–17). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Conway, A. R. A., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. W. (2005). Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 769–786. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conway, A. R. A., Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2003). Working memory capacity and its relation to general intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 547–552. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cowan, N. (2005). Working memory capacity. New York, NY: Psychology Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Graaff, R. (1997). The eXperanto experiment: Effects of explicit instruction on second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 249–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114–138). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google 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, 511–537. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2004). The definition and measurement of explicit knowledge. Language Learning, 54, 227–275. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). The differential effects of corrective feedback on two grammatical structures. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 339–360). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2009). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language. In R. Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Philp, & H. Reinders (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 31–64). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R., & Sheen, Y. (2006). Reexamining the role of recasts in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 575–600. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. (2004). The reading span test and its predictive power for reading comprehension ability. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 136–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2003). Input and interaction. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 224–255). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goo, J. (2010). Working memory and reactivity. Language Learning, 60, 712–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Corrective feedback and working memory capacity in interaction-driven L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 445–474. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goo, J., Granena, G., Yilmaz, Y., & Novella, M. (2015). Implicit and explicit instruction in L2 learning: Norris & Ortega (2000) revisited and updated. In P. Rebuschat (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 443–482). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H., & 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, 97–112.Google Scholar
Jarrold, C., & Towse, J. N. (2006). Individual differences in working memory. Neuroscience, 139, 39–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A., & Harrington, M. (2011). Aspects of working memory in L2 learning. Language Teaching, 44, 137–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kane, M. J., Hambrick, D. Z., Tuholski, S. W., Wilhelm, O., Payne, T. W., & Engle, R. W. (2004). The generality of working memory capacity: A latent-variable approach to verbal and visuospatial memory span and reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 189–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keck, C. M., Iberri-Shea, G., Tracy-Ventura, N., & Wa-Mbaleka, S. (2006). Investigating the empirical link between task-based interaction and acquisition: A meta-analysis. In J. M. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 91–131). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y., Payant, C., & Pearson, P. (2015). The intersection of task-based interaction, task complexity, and working memory: L2 question development through recasts in a laboratory setting. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 549–581. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, S. (2013). The interactions between the effects of implicit and explicit feedback and individual differences in language analytic ability and working memory. The Modern Language Journal, 97, 634–654. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loewen, S., & Nabei, T. (2007). Measuring the effects of oral corrective feedback on L2 knowledge. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 361–377). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. The Modern Language Journal, 90, 536–556. DOI logoGoogle 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). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(2007). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Long, M. H., Inagaki, S., & Ortega, L. (1998). The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 357–371. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R. (1998a). Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 51–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998b). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48, 183–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399–432. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R., & Izquierdo, J. (2009). Prompts versus recasts in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 59, 453–498. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Counterpoint piece: The case for variety in corrective feedback research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 167–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 265–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46, 1–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A. (2012). Input, interaction and corrective feedback in L2 learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Abbuhl, R., & Gass, S. M. (2012). Interactionist approaches. In S. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 7–23). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Adams, R., Stafford, C., & Winke, P. (2010). Exploring the relationship between modified output and working memory capacity. Language Learning, 60, 501–533. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive implicit negative feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 471–497. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 407–452). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Philp, J., Egi, T., Fujii, A., & Tatsumi, T. (2002). Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback and L2 development. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 181–209). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Sachs, R. (2012). Older learners in SLA research: A first look at working memory, feedback, and L2 development. Language Learning, 62, 704–740. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McDonough, K. (2007). Interactional feedback and the emergence of simple past activity verbs in L2 English. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 323–338). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Miyake, A., & Shah, P. (Eds.). (1999). Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59, 411–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 573–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Philp, J. (2003). Constraints on noticing the gap: Nonnative speakers’ noticing of recasts in NS-NNS interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 99–126.Google Scholar
Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493–527. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996). Do second language learners need negotiation? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 34, 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Révész, A. (2012). Working memory and the observed effectiveness of recasts on different L2 outcome measures. Language Learning, 62, 93–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosen, V. M., & Engle, R. W. (1997). The role of working memory capacity in retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 211–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998). Working memory capacity and suppression. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 418–436. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sagarra, N. (2007). From CALL to face-to-face interaction: The effect of computer-delivered recasts and working memory on L2 development. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 229–248). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sagarra, N., & Abbuhl, R. (2013). Optimizing the noticing of recasts via computer-delivered feedback: Evidence that oral input enhancement and working memory help second language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 97, 196–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8, 263–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006). Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptake. Language Teaching Research, 10, 361–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 301–322). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shipstead, Z., Lindsey, D. R. B., Marshall, R. L., & Engle, R. W. (2014). The mechanisms of working memory capacity: Primary memory, secondary memory, and attention control. Journal of Memory and Language, 72, 116–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (2009). Interaction research in second/foreign language classrooms. In A. Mackey & C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on interaction (pp. 157–175). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2008). Form-focused instruction: Isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly, 42, 181–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 263–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tokowicz, N., Michael, E. B., & Kroll, J. F. (2004). The roles of study-abroad experience and working-memory capacity in the types of errors made during translation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7, 255–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trofimovich, P., Ammar, A., & Gatbonton, E. (2007). How effective are recasts? The role of attention, memory, and analytic ability. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 171–195). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Turner, M. L., & Engle, R. W. (1989). Is working memory capacity task dependent? Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 127–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Unsworth, N. (2007). Individual differences in working memory capacity and episodic retrieval: Examining the dynamics of delayed and continuous distractor free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 1020–1034.Google Scholar
Unsworth, N., & Engle, R. W. (2007). The nature of individual differences in working memory capacity: active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search from secondary memory. Psychological Review, 114, 104–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., & Engle, R. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 498–505. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. N. (2012). Working memory and SLA. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 427–441). New York, NY: Routlege.Google Scholar
Yang, Y., & Lyster, R. (2010). Effects of form-focused practice and feedback on Chinese EFL learners’ acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 235–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yilmaz, Y. (2012). The relative effects of explicit correction and recasts on two target structures via two communication modes. Language Learning, 64, 1134–1169. Doi: DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Relative effects of explicit and implicit feedback: The role of working memory capacity and language analytic ability. Applied Linguistics, 34, 344–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (11)

Cited by 11 other publications

Alipour, Javad, Maryam Mohebi & Ali Roohani
2023. The interaction of working memory capacity and engagement with recasts on different L2 outcome measures: A replication of Révész (2012). Language Teaching 56:3 ► pp. 377 ff. DOI logo
Sato, Yusuke
2023. The relationships between individual differences in working memory and language analytical ability and the effectiveness of different types of corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Studies 6:1 ► pp. 183 ff. DOI logo
McDonough, Kim, Pavel Trofimovich, Phung Dao & Dato Abashidze
2020. Eye gaze and L2 speakers’ responses to recasts: A systematic replication study of McDonough, Crowther, Kielstra and Trofimovich (2015). Language Teaching 53:1 ► pp. 81 ff. DOI logo
Goo, Jaemyung
2019. Interaction in L2 Learning. In The Cambridge Handbook of Language Learning, ► pp. 233 ff. DOI logo
Goo, Jaemyung
2020. Research on the role of recasts in L2 learning. Language Teaching 53:3 ► pp. 289 ff. DOI logo
Granena, Gisela
2019. Language Aptitudes in L2 Acquisition. In The Cambridge Handbook of Language Learning, ► pp. 390 ff. DOI logo
Granena, Gisela & Yucel Yilmaz
2019. Corrective Feedback and the Role of Implicit Sequence‐Learning Ability in L2 Online Performance. Language Learning 69:S1 ► pp. 127 ff. DOI logo
Granena, Gisela & Yucel Yilmaz
2021. Corrective Feedback and Grammatical Complexity: A Research Synthesis. In The Cambridge Handbook of Corrective Feedback in Second Language Learning and Teaching, ► pp. 754 ff. DOI logo
Granena, Gisela & Yucel Yilmaz
2022. Chapter 7. Immediate versus delayed oral negative feedback. In Second Language Acquisition Theory [Bilingual Processing and Acquisition, 14], ► pp. 127 ff. DOI logo
YILMAZ, YUCEL & GISELA GRANENA
2019. Cognitive Individual Differences as Predictors of Improvement and Awareness Under Implicit and Explicit Feedback Conditions. The Modern Language Journal 103:3 ► pp. 686 ff. DOI logo
Yilmaz, Yucel & Gisela Granena
2021. IMPLICITNESS AND EXPLICITNESS IN COGNITIVE ABILITIES AND CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 43:3 ► pp. 523 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 december 2024. 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.