Cover not available
Part of
Domains and Directions in the Development of TBLT: A decade of plenaries from the international conference
Edited by Martin Bygate
[Task-Based Language Teaching 8] 2015
► pp. 87–122

The Cognition Hypothesis, second language task demands, and the SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing

| Aoyama Gakuin University

This chapter first summarises the basic pedagogic claim of the Cognition Hypothesis, that the cognitive demands of tasks be sequenced from simple to complex for learners, and describes a theoretically motivated model for syllabus designers and teachers to follow in planning and implementing such task sequences. This is followed by a description of the Triadic Componential Framework of task characteristics, which makes distinctions between task complexity, task conditions, and task difficulty. Next, I discuss the extent to which individual differences in cognitive and affective factors may mediate the effects of task complexity and task conditions on learning, interaction, and language production, and I argue for the need to research the interactions between task complexity/condition and task difficulty. The chapter concludes by identifying some points of contrast between the claims of the Cognition Hypothesis and Peter Skehan`s Trade-Off Hypothesis, and the differences in their intended scope of application to pedagogy.

Published online: 5 November 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.8.04rob
References
Achard, M
(2008) Teaching construal: Cognitive pedagogical grammar. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 431–455). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Achard, M. & Niemeier, S
(Eds.) (2004) Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ackerman, P
(2003) Aptitude complexes and trait complexes. Educational Psychologist, 38, 85–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Altman, H
(Ed.) (1972) Individualizing the foreign language classroom. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Andersen, R
(1984) The one-to-one principle of interlanguage construction. Language Learning, 34, 77–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andersen, R. & Shirai, Y
(1996) The primacy of aspect in first and second language acquisition - The pidgin-creole connection. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 527–570). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Astington, J., & Baird, J
(Eds.) (2005) Why language matters for theory of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bandura, A
(1997) Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman & Co.Google Scholar
Baralt, M
(2013) The impact of cognitive complexity on feedback efficacy during online versus face to face interactive tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 689–726. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baralt, M., Gilabert, R., & Robinson, P
(2014a) (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
(2014b) An introduction to theory and research in task sequencing and instructed language learning. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert, & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning (pp. 1–34). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K
(2007) One functional approach to second language acquisition: The concept-oriented approach. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 57–76). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bartsch, K. & Wellman, H
(1995) Children talk about the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Behrens, H
(2001) Cognitive-conceptual development and the acquisition of grammatical morphemes: The development of time concepts and verb tense. In M. Bowerman & S. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 450–474). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berman, R
(2004) Between emergence and mastery: The long developmental route of language acquisition. In R. Berman (Ed.), Language development across childhood and adolescence (pp. 9–35). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berman, R., & Slobin, D
(Eds.) (1994) Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E
(1994) Analysis and control in the development of second language proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 157–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowerman, M. & Levinson, S
(Eds.) (2001) Language acquisition and conceptual development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brambor, T., Clark, W. & Golder, M
(2006) Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14, 63–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bylund, E
(2011) Language-specific patterns in event conceptualization: Insights from bilingualism. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Thinking and speaking in two languages (pp. 108–142). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Cadierno, T. & Robinson, P
(2009) Language typology, task complexity and the development of L2 lexicalization patterns for describing motion events. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 245–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Candlin, C
(1984) Syllabus design as a critical process. In C. Brumfit (Ed.), General English syllabus design (pp. 29–46). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Carassa, A., Aprigliano, A. & Geminiani, G
(2000) Describers and explorers: A method for investigating cognitive maps. In S. O’Nuallain (Ed.), Spatial cognition (pp. 33–43). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J
(1993) Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. & Sapon, S
(1959) Modern Language Aptitude Test. Washington, DC: Second Language Testing Incorporated.Google Scholar
Collis, J. & Messick, S
(Eds.) (2001) Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Cornell, E., Heth, D. & Alberts, D
(1994) Place recognition and way finding by children and adults. Memory and Cognition, 22, 633–643. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Costa, P. & McCrae, R
(1985) The NEO Personality Inventory Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Cowan, N
(2005) Working memory capacity. New York, NY: Psychology Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Craik, F. & Lockhart, R
(1972) Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crombie, W
(1985) Process and relation in discourse and language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L
(1975) Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cronbach, L. & Snow, R
(1977) Aptitudes and instructional methods. New York, NY: Irvington.Google Scholar
de Bot, K., Lowie, W. & Verspoor, M
(2007) A dynamic systems theory of second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 7–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deary, I
(2000) Looking down on human intelligence: From psychometrics to the brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deissel, H
(2004) The acquisition of complex sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R
(2001) Automaticity and automatization. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.125–151). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dornyei, Z
(2002) The motivational basis of language learning tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.137–158). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005) The psychology of the language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Doughty, C
(2001) Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206–257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. & Williams, J
(1998) Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.197–262). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ehret, B., Gray, W. & Kirschenbaum, R
(2000) Contending with complexity: Developing and using a scaled world in applied cognitive research. Human Factors, 2, 8–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eisenstein, M
(Ed.) (1989) The dynamic interlanguage. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N
(1998) Emergentism, connectionism and second language learning. Language Learning, 48, 631–664. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003) Constructions, chunking, and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 63–103). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. & Larsen-Freeman, D
(2006) Language emergence: Implications for Applied Linguistics—Introduction to the special issue. Applied Linguistics, 27, 558–589. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. & Robinson, P
(2008) An introduction to Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 3–24) London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ellis, R
(1993) The structural syllabus and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 91–113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003) Task-based language teaching and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(Ed.) (2005) Planning and second language task performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fine, S
(1974) Functional job analysis: An approach to technology for manpower planning. Personnel Journal, 11, 813–818.Google Scholar
Fleishman, E., & Quaintenance, M
(1984) Taxonomies of human performance: The description of human tasks. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fries, C
(1952) The structure of English. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace and Company.Google Scholar
Furnham, E. & Ribchester, T
(1995) Tolerance of Ambiguity: A review of the concept, its measurement and applications. Current Psychology, 14, 179–199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gagne, R., Wager, W., Golas, K. & Keller, J
(2005) Principles of instructional design, (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson.Google Scholar
Garcia Mayo, M.P
(Ed.) (2007) Investigating tasks in formal language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Gilabert, R
(2005) Task complexity and L2 oral narrative production. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. University of Barcelona, Department of Applied Linguistics, Spain.Google Scholar
(2007) The simultaneous manipulation along the planning time and +/- Here-and-Now dimensions: Effects on oral L2 production. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 44–68). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Gilabert, R., Baron, J. & Llanes, M
(2009) Manipulating task complexity across task types and its influence on learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 47, 367–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldman, A
(2006) Simulating minds. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grange, J. & Houghten, G
(Eds.) (2014) Task switching and cognitive control. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Han, Z., & Cadierno, T
(Eds.) (2010) Linguistic relativity in SLA: Thinking for speaking. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Han, Z. & Odlin, T
(Eds.) (2006) Studies of fossilization in second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Healy, A. & Kole, J
(2013) Rehearsal. In P. Robinson (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp. 553–555). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hoffman, R. & Militello, L
(2009) Perspectives on cognitive task analysis. New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Hollnagel, E
(2003) (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive task design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I
(Eds.) (2012) Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huebner, T
(1983) A longtitudinal analysis of the acquisition of English. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J
(2001) Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of rehearsal, elaboration and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 349–381). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2003) Incidental and intentional learning. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 631–678). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ishikawa, T
(2007) The effects of increasing task complexity along the -/+ Here-and-Now dimension. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating Tasks in Formal Language Learning (pp. 136–156). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(2008) Task complexity, reasoning demands and second language speech production. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Aoyama Gakuin University, Department of English, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
Kim, Y
(2009) The effects of task complexity on learner-learner interaction. System, 37, 254–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y. & Tracy-Ventura, N
(2011) Task complexity, language anxiety and the development of the simple past. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 39–60). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I
(2007) Cognitive task complexity and linguistic performance in French L2 writing. In M. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 117–135). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Langdon, R., Coltheart, M., Ward, P. & Catts, S
(2002) Disturbed communication in schizophrenia: The role of pragmatics and poor theory-of-mind. Psychological Medicine, 32, 1273–1284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L
(2007) Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M
(1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Lee, E. & Rescorla, L
(2002) The use of psychological state terms by late talkers at age 3. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23, 623–641. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lesgold, A
(2001) The nature and methods of learning by doing. American Psychologist, 56, 964–973. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levkina, M. & Gilabert, R
(2014) Task sequencing in the L2 development of spatial expressions. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning. (pp. 37–71). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Li, Ping & Shirai, Y
(2000) The acquisition of lexical and grammatical aspect. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lohman, D
(2000) Complex information processing and intelligence. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Intelligence (pp. 285–340). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lohman, H. & Tomasello, M
(2003) The role of language in the development of false belief Understanding: A training study. Child Development, 74, 1130–1144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, M
(1985) A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modeling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 77–99). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(1991) Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003) Stabilization and fossilization in interlanguage. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 487–536). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2014) Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Long, M. & Crookes, G
(1992) Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 27–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, M. & Robinson, P
(1998) Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, P
(2002) Motivation, anxiety and emotion in second language acquisition. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 45–64). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A
(2007) (Ed.), Conversational interaction in SLA. Oxford: 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. 181–210). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malicka, A
(2014) The role of task sequencing in monologic oral production. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning. (pp. 71–93). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Malle, B
(2004) How the mind explains behavior. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Martin, K. & Ellis, N
(2012) The roles of phonological STM and Working Memory in L2 grammar and vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 379–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthews, G. & Deary, I
(1998) Personality traits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCormick, E
(1979) Job Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York, NY: AMACOM Publishing.Google Scholar
Meisel, J
(1987) Reference to past events and actions in the development of natural second language acquisition. In C. Pfaff (Ed.), First and second language acquisition processes (pp. 206–224). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Michel, M
(2013) Effects of task complexity on the use of conjunctions in oral L2 task performance. Modern Language Journal, 97, 178–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michel, M.C., Kuiken, F. & Vedder, I
(2007) The influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch L2. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45 (3), 241–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Monsell, S
(2003) Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7 (3), 134–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Munoz, C
(Ed) (2006) Age and the rate of second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Niwa, Y
(2000) Reasoning demands of L2 tasks and L2 narrative production: Effects of individual differences in working memory, intelligence and aptitude. Unpublished M.A. dissertation. Aoyama Gakuin University, Department of English, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
Nixon, S
(2005) Mental state verb production and sentential complements in four-year-old children. First Language, 25, 19–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
North, R. & Riley, V
(1989) WINDEX: A predictive model of operator workload. In G. McMillan, D. Beevis, E. Sala, M. Strub, R. Sutton & L. Van Breda (Eds.), Applications of human performance models to systems design (pp. 81–89). New York, NY: Plenum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nuevo, A
(2006) Task complexity and interaction: L2 learning opportunities and interaction. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. Georgetown University, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Nyborg, H
(Ed.) (2003) The scientific study of general intelligence. New York, NY: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Odlin, T
(2008) Conceptual transfer and meaning extensions. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 306–340). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ortega, L
(2009) Sequences and processes in language learning. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp. 81–107). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ortega, L. & Byrnes, H
(Eds.) (2008) The longtitudinal study of advanced L2 capacities. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pang, F. & Skehan, P
(2014) Self-reported planning behaviour and second language performance. in narrative retellings. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspective on task performance. (pp. 95–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parks, D. & Boueck, G
(1989) Workload prediction, diagnosis and continuing challenges. In G. McMillan, D. Beevis, E. Sala, M. Strub, R. Sutton & L. Van Breda (Eds.), Applications of human performance models to systems design (pp. 47–64). New York, NY: Plenum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavlenko, A
(Ed.) (2011) Thinking and speaking in two languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, A. & Jarvis, S
(2007) Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Perdue, C
(Ed.) (1993a) Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives, Vol. 1: Field methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(Ed.) (1993b) Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives, Vol. 2: The results. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pica, T., Kanagy, R. & Falodun, J
(1993) Choosing and using communication tasks for second language teaching and research. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks in language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 9–34). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Plough, I. & Gass, S
(1993) Interlocutor and task familiarity: Effects on interactional structure. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (95–122). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Prabhu, N.S
(1987) Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Putz, M., Niemeier, S. & Dirven, R
(2001) (Eds.) Applied Cognitive Linguistics I1: Language pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Révész, A
(2009) Task complexity, focus on form and second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 437–470. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) Task complexity, focus on L2 constructions, and individual differences: A classroom-based study. Modern Language Journal, 95, 162–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rezaei, S. & Kashani, A
(2011) Task complexity, language proficiency and task-based writing. Saarbrucken: VDM Verlag Dr. Muller.Google Scholar
Riegeluth, C
(Ed.) (1999a) Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(1999b) The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence. In C. Riegeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II (pp. 425–453). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Riegeluth, C. & Carr-Chelman, A
(2009) Understanding instructional theory. In C. Riegeluth & A. Carr-Chelman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base, Vol. III (pp. 3–26). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ringbom, H
(2006) Cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Robinson, P
(1995) Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45, 99–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996) Connecting tasks, cognition and syllabus design. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Task complexity and second language syllabus design: Data-based Studies and Speculations (pp. 1–16). Brisbane: University of Queensland Working Papers in Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
(1997) Generalizability and automaticity of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced and rule-search conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 223–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001a) Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 27–57. DOI logoGoogle 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: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001c) Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes, and learning conditions in SLA. Second Language Research, 17, 368–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002a) Learning conditions, aptitude complexes and SLA: A framework for research and pedagogy. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.113–133). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002b) Individual differences in intelligence, aptitude and working memory during adult incidental second language learning: A replication and extension of Reber, Walkenfeld and Hernstadt (1991). In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 211–266). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002c) (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003a) Attention and memory during SLA. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 631–678). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003b) The Cognition Hypothesis, task design and adult task-based language learning. Second Language Studies, 21, (2), 45–107. [URL]Google Scholar
(2005a) Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: A review of studies in a Componential Framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43,1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005b) Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 45–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005c) Cognitive abilities, chunk-strength, and frequency effects in implicit artificial grammar and incidental L2 learning: Replications of Reber, Walkenfeld and Hernstadt (1991) and Knowlton and Squire (1996) and their relevance for SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 235–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007a) Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 7–27). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(2007b) Aptitudes, abilities, contexts and practice. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in second language learning: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 256–286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2007c) Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 193–214.Google Scholar
(2009) Syllabus design. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp. 294–310). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011b) Second language task complexity, the Cogntition Hypothesis, language learning, and performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 3–37). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011c) Task-based language learning: A review of issues. Language Learning, 61 (S1), 1–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012a) Individual differences, aptitude complexes, SLA processes, and aptitude test development. In M. Pawlak (Ed.), New perspectives on individual differences in second language learning and teaching (pp. 57–77). New York, NY: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012b) Abilities to learn: Cognitive abilities. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 17–20). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
(2013) Aptitude in second language acquisition. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 129–133). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Robinson, P., Cadierno, T. & Shirai, Y
(2009) Time and motion: Measuring the effects of the conceptual demands of tasks on second language production. Applied Linguistics, 28, 533–554. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P. & Ellis, N
(Eds.) (2008a) Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2008b) Cognitive Linguistics, Second Language Acquisition and instruction—Issues for research. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 489–546). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. & Gilabert, R
(2007) (Eds.), Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language instruction.[Special issue] International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45(3). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. & Ha, M
(1993) Instance theory and second language rule learning under explicit conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 413–438. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roeser, R., Shavelson, R., Kupermintz, H. & Lau, S
(2002) The concept of aptitude and multidimensional validity revisited. Educational Assessment, 8 (2), 191–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sachs, J
(1983) Talking about the there and then: The emergence of displaced reference in parent-child discourse. In K. Nelson (Ed.), Children`s language, Vol. 4 (pp.1–28). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Samuda, V. & Bygate, M
(2008) Tasks in second language learning. Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Sato, C
(1990) The syntax of conversation in interlanguage development. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Schank, R
(1999) Dynamic memory revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schank, R. & Abelson, R
(1977) Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Schank, R., Berman, T. & Macpherson, K
(1999) Learning by doing. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II, (pp. 161–182). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Schneider, W., Schumann-Hengsteler, R., & Sodian, B
(2005) (Eds.), Young children`s cognitive development: Interrelationships among executive functioning, working memory, verbal ability, and theory of mind. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R
(2001) Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmiedtova, B., von Stutterheim, C., & Carroll, M
(2011) Language specific patterns in event construal of advanced second language speakers. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Thinking and speaking in two languages (pp. 66–107). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Seel, N
(2012) Schema development. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp.2936–2939). New York, NY: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N
(2003) Automaticity and second languages. In C. Doughty & M.H. Long (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, pp. 382–408. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp. 53–57). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sheen, Y
(2008) Recasts, language anxiety, modified output and L2 learning. Language Learning, 58, 833–874. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shirai, Y
(1999) The prototype hypothesis of tense aspect acquisition. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Representation and process: Proceedings of the 3rd Pacific Second Language Research Forum, Vol 1. (pp. 151–164). Tokyo: PACSLRF.Google Scholar
Shuell, T
(1980) Learning theory, instructional theory and adaptation. In R. Snow, P. Federico & W. Montague (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction, Vol. 2: Cognitive process analyses of learning and problem solving (pp. 277–302). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Skehan, P
(1989) Individual differences in second language acquisition. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
(1998) A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2002) Theorizing and updating aptitude. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 69–94). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Language aptitude. In S. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 381–395). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2014a) (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014b) The context for researching a processing perspective on task performance. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. (pp. 1–26). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014c) Limited attentional capacity, second language performance and task-based pedagogy. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. (pp. 211–262). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P. & Foster, P
(2001) Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D
(1993) Adult language acquisition: A view from child language study. In C. Perdue (Ed.), Adult language acquisition: Crosslinguistic perspectives, Vol. 2: The results (pp. 239–252). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1996) From 'thought and language' to 'thinking for speaking'. In J. Gumperz & S. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2003) Language and thought online: Some cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the investigation of language and thought (pp. 157–191). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Snow, R
(1987) Aptitude complexes. In R. Snow & M. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction, Vol. 3: Conative and affective process analysis, (pp. 11–34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(1994) Abilities in academic tasks. In R. Sternberg & R. Wagner (Eds.), Mind in context: Interactionist perspectives on human intelligence, (pp. 3–37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Snow, R. & Farr, M
(1987) (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction Vol. 3: Conative and affective process analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Snow, R., Federico, P. & Montague, W
(1980) (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction Vols 1 & 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Snow, R., Kyllonen, P. & Marshalek, B
(1984) The topography of ability and learning correlations. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp.47–103). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Sokal, R
(1974) Classification: Purposes, principles, progress, prospects. Science, 185, 1115–1123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spilsbury, G., Stankov, L. & Roberts, R
(1990) The effects of a task’s difficulty on its correlation with intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 1069–1077. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stanovitch, K
(2000) Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Talmy, L
(2000) Towards a cognitive semantics, Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2008) Aspects of attention in language. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 27–38) London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Trebits, A
(2015) Sources of individual differences in L2 narrative production: The contribution of input, processing, and output anxiety. Applied Linguistics, 36. first published online April 8, 2014 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trim, J. & North, B
(Eds.) (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching and assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, A
(2008) Cognitive linguistics and second language instruction. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 456–488) London: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2012) Cognitive linguistics and second language learning. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tyler, A. & Evans, V
(2003) The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van den Branden, K
(2006) (Ed.) Task-based language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Ek, J
(1976) The threshold level for modern language learning in schools. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Van Geert, P
(2008) The Dynamic Systems approach in the study of L1 and L2 acquisition: An introduction. Modern Language Journal, 92, 179–199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Stutterheim, C., Flecken, M. & Carroll, M
(2013) Introduction: Conceptualizing in a second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 51, 77–85.Google Scholar
von Stutterheim, C. & Klein, W
(1987) A concept-oriented approach to second language studies. In C. Pfaff (Ed.), First and second language acquisition processes (pp. 191–205). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
von Stutterheim, C. & Nuese, R
(2003) Processes of conceptualisation in language production: Language specific perspectives and event construal. Linguistics, 41, 851–888.Google Scholar
Wen, Z., Mota, M. & McNeill, A
(Eds.) (2015) Working Memory in second language acquisition and processing. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Wilkins, D
(1976) Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, J
(1999) Attention, memory and inductive learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, R
(1977) A behavioral typology of educational objectives for the cognitive domain. Educational Technology, 17, 418–431.Google Scholar
Willis, D
(1990) The lexical syllabus: A new approach to language teaching. London: Collins.Google Scholar
Wood, R
(1986) Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 60–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yule, G. & MacDonald, M
(1990) Resolving referential conflicts in L2 interaction: The effect of proficiency and interactive role. Language Learning, 40, 539–556. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 47 other publications

Abdi Tabari, Mahmoud & Minyoung Cho
2022. Task sequencing and L2 writing development: Exploring the SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing. Language Teaching Research ► pp. 136216882210909 ff. DOI logo
Mohammad Javad Ahmadian & Michael H. Long
2021. The Cambridge Handbook of Task-Based Language Teaching, DOI logo
Albert, Ágnes
2022. Empirical Research on Emotions, Motivation, Self-Efficacy, and Flow with the Help of Tasks. In Investigating the Role of Affective Factors in Second Language Learning Tasks [Second Language Learning and Teaching, ], ► pp. 51 ff. DOI logo
Albert, Ágnes
2022. Language Tasks. In Investigating the Role of Affective Factors in Second Language Learning Tasks [Second Language Learning and Teaching, ], ► pp. 31 ff. DOI logo
Albert, Ágnes
2022. The Interview-Based Study: Exploring Teachers’ Views Concerning Language Tasks. In Investigating the Role of Affective Factors in Second Language Learning Tasks [Second Language Learning and Teaching, ], ► pp. 127 ff. DOI logo
Allaw, Elissa
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. DOI 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. DOI logo
Bell, Philippa & Caroline Payant
2021. La place de la grammaire dans l’approche de l’Enseignement des langues basé sur les tâches : discussion entre les professeures Philippa Bell et Caroline Payant. La Revue de l’AQEFLS: Revue de l’Association québécoise des enseignants de français langue seconde 34:2 DOI logo
Bygate, Martin
2016. TBLT through the lens of applied linguistics. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 167:1 ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Bygate, Martin
2018. Introduction. In Learning Language through Task Repetition [Task-Based Language Teaching, 11], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Bygate, Martin
2020. Some directions for the possible survival of TBLT as a real world project. Language Teaching 53:3 ► pp. 275 ff. DOI logo
Chan, Hang
2023. Ideating task‐based designs for special education learners. TESOL Journal 14:3 DOI logo
Crawford, William J. & Meixiu Zhang
2021. How can register analysis inform task-based language teaching?. Register Studies 3:2 ► pp. 180 ff. DOI logo
Ellis, Rod
2021. Options in a task-based language-teaching curriculum. TASK. Journal on Task-Based Language Teaching and Learning 1:1 ► pp. 11 ff. DOI logo
Ellis, Rod, Peter Skehan, Shaofeng Li, Natsuko Shintani & Craig Lambert
2019. Task-Based Language Teaching, DOI logo
González-Lloret, Marta
2022. The present and future of functional adequacy. TASK. Journal on Task-Based Language Teaching and Learning 2:1 ► pp. 146 ff. DOI logo
Jackson, Daniel O.
2022. Task-Based Language Teaching, DOI logo
Kaufmann, Austin, Adam Gacs, Luca Giupponi & Koen Van Gorp
2023. A Model for Scaffolded Technology-Enhanced Oral Communicative Tasks. In Optimizing Online English Language Learning and Teaching [English Language Education, 31], ► pp. 129 ff. DOI logo
Lin, Yen-Liang
2021. Gestures as scaffolding for L2 narrative recall: The role of gesture type, task complexity, and working memory. Language Teaching Research ► pp. 136216882110445 ff. DOI logo
Loewen, Shawn & Masatoshi Sato
2021. Exploring the relationship between TBLT and ISLA. TASK. Journal on Task-Based Language Teaching and Learning 1:1 ► pp. 47 ff. DOI logo
Long, Michael H., Jiyong Lee & Kyoko Kobayashi Hillman
2019. Task-Based Language Learning. In The Cambridge Handbook of Language Learning, ► pp. 500 ff. DOI logo
Mueller, Charles M. & Peter Richardson
2022. Talking about oneself. Journal of Second Language Studies 5:2 ► pp. 344 ff. DOI logo
PANG, FRANCINE & PETER SKEHAN
2021. Performance Profiles on Second Language Speaking Tasks. The Modern Language Journal 105:1 ► pp. 371 ff. DOI logo
Peng, Cheng & Zhen Bao
2023. Effects of reasoning demands triggered by genre on Chinese EFL learners' writing performance. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
Plakans, Lia, Atta Gebril & Zeynep Bilki
2019. Shaping a score: Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in integrated writing performances. Language Testing 36:2 ► pp. 161 ff. DOI logo
Qiu, Xuyan
2022. Picture or non-picture? The influence of narrative task types on lower- and higher-proficiency EFL learners’ oral production . International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 60:2 ► pp. 383 ff. DOI logo
Rahimi, Muhammad
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. DOI logo
Rahimi, Muhammad & Lawrence Jun Zhang
2019. Writing task complexity, students’ motivational beliefs, anxiety and their writing production in English as a second language. Reading and Writing 32:3 ► pp. 761 ff. DOI logo
Ren, Wei, Yiman Wu & Yuchen Peng
2023. Effects of task complexity, task sequence, and interlocutor familiarity on Chinese EFL learners’ self-repair in synchronous online interaction. Language Teaching Research DOI logo
Robinson, Peter & Roger Gilabert
2019. Task‐Based Learning: Cognitive Underpinnings. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Samuda, Virginia & Martin Bygate
2021. Exploring the Nuts and Bolts of Task Design. In The Cambridge Handbook of Task-Based Language Teaching, ► pp. 262 ff. DOI logo
Samuda, Virginia, Martin Bygate & Kris Van den Branden
2018. Introduction. In TBLT as a Researched Pedagogy [Task-Based Language Teaching, 12], ► pp. 2 ff. DOI logo
Santos, Sara
2023. Efeitos da repetição procedimental e da complexidade cognitiva da tarefa no desempenho oral em português língua estrangeira: estudo exploratório . Diacrítica 36:2 ► pp. 9 ff. DOI logo
Simard, Daphnée, Tatiana Molokopeeva & Yan Qing Zhang
2020. The Contribution of Working Memory to L2 French Pronunciation among Adult Language Learners. The Canadian Modern Language Review 76:1 ► pp. 50 ff. DOI logo
Skehan, Peter
2021. The Psycholinguistics of Task-Based Performance. In The Cambridge Handbook of Task-Based Language Teaching, ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Skehan, Peter
2022. Chapter 11. Performance on second language speaking tasks. In Second Language Acquisition Theory [Bilingual Processing and Acquisition, 14], ► pp. 211 ff. DOI logo
Skehan, Peter
2023. Linking second language speaking task performance and language testing. Language Teaching ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Souza Ferraz D'Ely, Raquel Carolina, Mailce Borges Mota & Martin Bygate
2019. Chapter 9. Strategic planning and repetition as metacognitive processes in task performance. In Researching L2 Task Performance and Pedagogy [Task-Based Language Teaching, 13], ► pp. 199 ff. DOI logo
Taguchi, Naoko & YouJin Kim
2018. Chapter 1. Task-based approaches to teaching and assessing pragmatics. In Task-Based Approaches to Teaching and Assessing Pragmatics [Task-Based Language Teaching, 10], ► pp. 2 ff. DOI logo
Tran, Mai Ngoc & Kazuya Saito
2024. Effects of the 4/3/2 activity revisited: Extending Boers (2014) and Thai & Boers (2016). Language Teaching Research 28:2 ► pp. 326 ff. DOI logo
Vangehuchten, Lieve, Mariëlle Leijten & Iris Schrijver
2018. Reading-to-write tasks for professional purposes in Spanish as a foreign language. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 31:2 ► pp. 638 ff. DOI logo
Wang, Zhan, Peter Skehan & Gaowei Chen
2019. The effects of hybrid online planning and L2 proficiency on video-based speaking task performance. Instructed Second Language Acquisition 3:1 ► pp. 53 ff. DOI logo
Wu, Libo & Hasliza Binti Abdul Halim
2024. Task complexity and foreign language writing emotions as predictors of EFL writing performance. Frontiers in Education 9 DOI logo
Xu, Jian, Xuyan Qiu & Lei Yang
2023. Unraveling the dynamics of English communicative motivation and self-efficacy through task-supported language teaching: a latent growth modeling perspective. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 0:0 DOI logo
Zhang, Weiwei, Lawrence Jun Zhang & Aaron J. Wilson
2022. Strategic competence, task complexity, and foreign language learners’ speaking performance: a hierarchical linear modelling approach. Applied Linguistics Review 0:0 DOI logo
Zhou, Jieyu & Chan Lü
2022. Enhancing Syntactic Complexity in L2 Chinese Writing: Effects of Form-Focused Instruction on the Chinese Topic Chain. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. How to Teach an Additional Language [Task-Based Language Teaching, 15], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 april 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.