Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Think-Aloud Protocols in Second Language Writing

Part of the book series: English Language Education ((ELED,volume 34))

  • 182 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter aims to establish the significance of our research on the validity of TAPs. As a start, some definitional issues are clarified to ensure that further discussion of the validity issues is based on a uniform understanding of what TAPs are and how TAPs differ from other types of verbal reports, especially introspection. The second part of this chapter introduces how widely TAPs have been used in first language (L1) and L2 research, writing research in particular, to underline the importance of TAPs as a method to collect data on human thinking. Against this backdrop, this chapter then introduces the long-lasting validity issues and surmises consequences that might be caused due to TAPs’ lack of validity. The chapter finally points out the scarcity of empirical studies on the validity of TAPs in L2 writing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Afflerbach, P., & Johnston, P. (1984). On the use of verbal reports in reading research. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16(4), 307–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armengol, L., & Cots, J. (2009). Attention processes observed in think-aloud protocols: Two multilingual informants writing in two languages. Language Awareness, 18, 259–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkaoui, K. (2011). Think-aloud protocols in research on essay rating: An empirical study of their veridicality and reactivity. Language Testing, 28(1), 51–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellezza, F. S. (1986). Mental cues and verbal reports in learning. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 20, pp. 237–273). Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., Burtis, P. J., & Scardamalia, M. (1988). Cognitive operations in constructing main points in written composition. Journal of Memory & Language, 27, 261–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, E. (1992). See how they read: Comprehension monitoring of L1 and L2 readers. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 319–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowles, M. A. (2008). Task type and reactivity of verbal reports in SLA: A first look at a L2 task other than reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 359–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowles, M. A. (2010). The think-aloud controversy in second language research. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bowles, M. A. (2018). Introspective verbal reports: Think-alouds and stimulated recall. In A. Phakiti, P. DeCosta, L. Plonsky, & S. Starfield (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of applied linguistics research methodology (pp. 339–357). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bowles, M. A., & Leow, R. P. (2005). Reactivity and type of verbal report in SLA research methodology: Expanding the scope of investigation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 415–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breetvelt, I., Bergh, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1994). Relations between writing processes and text quality: When and how? Cognition and Instruction, 12, 103–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkman, J. A. (1993). Verbal protocol accuracy in fault diagnosis. Ergonomics, 36, 1381–1397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broderick, L., Bjorner, B. J., Lauher-Charest, M., White, K. M., Kosinski, M., Mulhern, B., & Brazier, J. (2022). Deciding between SF-6Dv2 health states: A think-aloud study of decision-making strategies used in discrete choice experiments. Value in Health. Advance online publication. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.07.018.

  • Chang, C. C., & Johnson, T. (2021). Integrating heuristics and think-aloud approach to evaluate the usability of game-based learning material. Journal of Computers in Education, 8, 137–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J. R. (2001). Fluency in writing: Generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18, 80–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chon, Y. V. (2008). The electronic dictionary for writing: A solution or a problem? International Journal of Lexicography, 22(1), 23–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claparede, E. (1934). Genèse de l’hypothèses (Genesis of the hypotheses). Archives de Psychologie, 24, 1–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. D. (1986). Mentalistic measures in reading strategy research: Some recent findings. English for Specific Purposes, 5, 131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. D. (1991). Feedback on writing: The use of verbal reports. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13(2), 133–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. D. (2000). Exploring strategies in test taking: Fine-tuning verbal reports from respondents. In G. Ekbatani & H. Pierson (Eds.), Learner-directed assessment in ESL (pp. 127–150). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. D. (2013). Verbal report. In C. A. Chapelle (General Ed.), The encyclopaedia of applied linguistics. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal1261

  • Compton, B. J., & Logan, G. D. (1991). The transition from algorithm to retrieval in memory-based theories of automaticity. Memory & Cognition, 19, 151–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, M., & Holzman, M. (1983). Talking about protocols. College Composition and Communication, 34, 284–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crutcher, R. J. (1994). Telling what we know: The use of verbal report methodologies in psychological research. Psychological Science, 5, 241–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, A. (1989). Writing expertise and second language proficiency. Language Learning, 39, 81–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, A. (1990a). Metalinguistic and ideational thinking in second language composing. Written Communication, 7(4), 482–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, A. (1990b). Expertise in evaluating second language compositions. Language Testing, 7, 31–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, A., Kantor, R., & Powers, D. (2002). Decision making while rating ESL/EFL writing tasks: A descriptive framework. Modern Language Journal, 86, 67–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J., & Bistodeau, L. (1993). How do L1 and L2 reading differ? Evidence from think aloud protocols. Modern Language Journal, 77, 459–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deschambault, R. (2018). Actively managed products: Think-aloud data and methods in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics Review, 9(4), 539–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncker, K. (1926). A qualitative (experimental and theoretical) study of productive thinking (solving of comprehensible problems). Pedagogical Seminar, 33, 642–708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durst, R. K. (1987). Cognitive and linguistic demands of analytic writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 21, 347–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R. (2001). Introduction: Investigating form-focused instruction. Language Learning, 51(Suppl.1), 1–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enriquez Raido, V. (2014). Translation and web searching. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Crutcher, R. J. (1991). Introspection and verbal reports on cognitive processes—Two approaches to the study of thinking: A response to Howe. New Ideas in Psychology, 9, 57–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1978). RVRs as data (Unpublished Manuscript No. CIP Working Paper No°388). Carnegie-Mellon University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1979). Thinking-aloud protocols as data: Effects of verbalization (Unpublished Manuscript No. CIP Working Paper No°397). Carnegie-Mellon University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (Rev. ed.). MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L., & Hayes, J. (1980a). The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In L. Gregg & E. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 31–50). Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L., & Hayes, J. (1980b). The cognition of discovery: Defining rhetorical problems. College Composition and Communication, 31, 21–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L., & Hayes, J. (1981a). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L., & Hayes, J. (1981b). Plans that guide the composing process. In C. H. Frederiksen & J. F. Dominic (Eds.), Writing: The nature, development, and teaching of written communication (pp. 39–58). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L., & Hayes, J. (1981c). The pregnant pause: An inquiry into the nature of planning. Research in the Teaching of English, 15(3), 229–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L., & Hayes, J. (1983). A cognitive model of the writing process in adults (Final report). Carnegie Mellon. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 240 608).

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, T. L. (2001). Readers’ parallel text construction while talking and thinking about the reading process. Dissertation Abstracts International, 62, 1329A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M. C., Ericsson, K. A., & Best, R. (2011). Do procedures for verbal reporting of thinking have to be reactive? A meta-analysis and recommendations for best reporting methods. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 316–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2000). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghanbari, N., & Barati, H. (2020). Development and validation of a rating scale for Iranian EFL academic writing assessment: A mixed-methods study. Language Testing in Asia, 10, 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-020-00112-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfroid, A., & Spino, L. (2015). Reconceptualizing reactivity of think-alouds and eye-tracking: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Language Learning, 65(4), 896–928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, A. (1998). Verbal protocol analysis in language testing research: A handbook. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, S., & Sutton, P. (2003). What do children think as they plan their writing? Reading: Literacy and Language, 37, 32–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harwood, N. (2018). What do proofreaders of student writing do to a master’s essay? Differing interventions, worrying findings. Written Communication, 35(4), 474–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 3–30). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1983). Uncovering cognitive processes in writing: An introduction to protocol analysis. In P. Mosenthal, L. Tamor, & S. A. Walmsley (Eds.), Research on writing: Principles and methods (pp. 207–220). Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1986). Writing research and the writer. American Psychologist, 41, 1106–1113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. R., Flower, L., Schriver, K., Stratman, J., & Carey, L. (1987). Cognitive processes in revision. In S. Rosenberg (Ed.), Advances in applied linguistics (Vol. 11: Reading, writing and language processing) (pp. 176–240). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jääskeläinen, R. (2000). Focus on methodology in think-aloud studies on translating. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit & R. Jääskeläinen (Eds.), Tapping and mapping the processes of translation and interpreting: Outlooks on empirical research (pp. 71–82). Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jääskeläinen, R. (2017). Verbal reports. In J. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The handbook of translation and cognition (pp. 213–231) Wiley-Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, D., van Waes, L., & van den Bergh, H. (1996). Effects of thinking aloud on writing processes. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing (pp. 233–250). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jourdenais, R. (2001). Cognition, instruction, and protocol analysis. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 354–375). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kern, R. G. (1994). The role of mental translation in second language reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 441–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langer, J. (1986). Children reading and writing: Structures and strategies. Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. (2020). A study of adolescent English learners’ cognitive engagement in writing while using an automated content feedback system. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33, 26–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leow, R. P. (1997). Attention, awareness, and foreign language behaviour. Language Learning, 47, 467–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leow, R. P. (1998). Toward operationalizing the process of attention in SLA: Evidence for Tomlin and Villa’s (1994) fine-grained analysis of attention. Applied PsychoLinguistics, 19, 133–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leow, R. P. (2000). A study of the role of awareness in foreign language behaviour: Aware versus unaware learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 557–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leow, R. P. (2001a). Attention, awareness, and foreign language behaviour. Language Learning, 51(Suppl.1), 113–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leow, R. P. (2001b). Do learners notice enhanced forms while interacting with the L2? An online and offline study of the role of written input enhancement in L2 reading. Hispania, 84, 496–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leow, R. P., & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). To think aloud or not to think aloud: The issue of reactivity in SLA research methodology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutz, J. A. (1987). A study of professional and experienced writers’ revising and editing at the computer and with pen and paper. Research in the Teaching of English, 21, 398–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, W. (1986). The disappearance of introspection. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manchón, R. M., Roca de Larios, J., & Murphy, L. (2009). The temporal dimension and problem-solving nature of foreign language composing processes: Implications for theory. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Writing in foreign language contexts: Learning, teaching, and research (pp. 102–129). Multilingual Matters.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Matsuhashi, A. (1987). Revising the plan or altering the text. In A. Matsuhashi (Ed.), Writing in real time: Modeling production processes (pp. 197–223). Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGeorge, P., & Burton, A. M. (1989). The effects of concurrent verbalization on performance in a dynamic systems task. British Journal of Psychology, 80, 455–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, G. M., Duffy, S. A., & Mack, R. L. (1984). Thinking-out-loud as a method for studying real-time comprehension processes. In D. E. Kieras & M. A. Just (Eds.), New methods in reading comprehension research (pp. 253–286). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, J. W. (1994). Thinking aloud: Insights into information processing. Psychological Science, 5(241), 245–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, J. W., Braunstein, M. L., & Carroll, J. S. (1978). Exploring predecisional behaviour: An alternative approach to decision research. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 22, 17–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qi, D., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Exploring the role of noticing in a three-stage second language writing task. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 277–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Révész, A., & Michel, M. (2019). Introduction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41(3), 491–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roca de Larios, J., Marín, J., & Murphy, L. (2001). A temporal analysis of formulation processes in L1 and L2 writing. Language Learning, 51, 497–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronowicz, E., Hehir, J., Kaimi, T., Kojima, K., & Lee, D.-S. (2005). Translator’s frequent lexis store and dictionary use as factors in SLT comprehension and translation speed: A comparative study of professional, paraprofessional and novice translators. Meta, 50, 580–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosa, E., & Leow, R. P. (2004a). Awareness, different learning conditions, and L2 development. Applied PsychoLinguistics, 25, 269–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosa, E., & Leow, R. P. (2004b). Computerized task-based exposure, explicitness, type of feedback, and Spanish L2 development. Modern Language Journal, 88, 192–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, H. (1985). The “thinking-aloud” methodology. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Problem solving and intelligence (pp. 99–117). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, J. E., Johnson, E. J., & Stephens, D. L. (1989). The validity of verbal protocols. Memory & Cognition, 17, 759–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, R., & Polio, C. (2007). Learners’ uses of two types of written feedback on an L2 writing revision task. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29, 67–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, H., Brandt, D., Bischof, A., Heidbrink, S., Bischof, G., Borgwardt, S., & Rumpf, H. (2022). Think-aloud analysis of commonly used screening instruments for Internet use disorders: The CIUS, the IGDT-10, and the BSMAS. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 11(2), 467–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selfe, C. L. (1984). The predrafting processes of four high and four low apprehensive writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 18, 45–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Severinson Eklundh, K., & Kollberg, P. (1996). A computer tool and framework for analyzing online revisions. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing (pp. 163–188). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegler, R. S. (1987). The perils of averaging data over strategies: An example from children’s addition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 250–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegler, R. S. (1989). Hazards of mental chronometry: An example from children’s subtraction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 497–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smagorinsky, P. (1989). The reliability and validity of protocol analysis. Written Communication, 6, 463–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stratman, J. F., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (1994). Reactivity in concurrent think-aloud protocols: Issues for research. In P. Smagorinsky (Ed.), Speaking about writing: Reflections on research methodology (pp. 89–112). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suh, B. (2020). Are think-alouds reactive? Evidence from an L2 written corrective feedback study. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820967166.

  • Sun, S., Li, T., & Zhou, X. (2020). Effects of thinking aloud on cognitive effort in translation. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies, 19, 132–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swarts, H., Flower, L. S., & Hayes, J. R. (1984). Designing protocol studies of the writing process: An introduction. In R. Beach & L. Bridwell (Eds.), New directions in composition research (pp. 53–71). Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timpe-Laughlin, V., Green, A., & Oh, S. (2021). Raising pragmatic awareness: A think-aloud study. System, 98, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trabasso, T., & Suh, S. (1993). Understanding text: Achieving explanatory coherence through on-line inferences and mental operations in working memory. Discourse Processes, 16, 3–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Upton, T. A., & Lee-Thompson, L. C. (2001). The role of the first language in second language reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 469–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzawa, K. (1996). Second language learners’ processes of L1 writing, L2 writing, and translation from L1 into L2. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 271–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, C. (1991). Holistic assessment: What goes on in the raters’ minds? In L. Hamp-Lyons (Ed.), Assessing second language writing in academic contexts (pp. 111–126). Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vieira, L. N. (2017). Cognitive effort and different task foci in post-editing of machine translation: A think-aloud study. Across Languages and Cultures, 18(1), 79–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, W. Y., & Wen, Q. F. (2002). L1 use in the L2 composing process: An exploratory study of 16 Chinese EFL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 225–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whalen, K., & Ménard, N. (1995). L1 and L2 writers’ strategic and linguistic knowledge: A model of multiple-level discourse processing. Language Learning, 44(3), 381–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigglesworth, G. (2005). Current approaches to researching second language learner processes. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 98–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wijgh, I. F. (1996). A communicative test in analysis: Strategies in reading authentic texts. In A. Cumming & R. Berwick (Eds.), Validation in language testing (pp. 154–170). Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willey, I., & Tanimoto, K. (2015). We’re drifting into strange territory here: What think- aloud protocols reveal about convenience editing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 63–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, T. D. (1994). The proper protocol: Validity and completeness of verbal reports. Psychological Science, 5, 249–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witte, S. P. (1987). Pre-text and composing. College Composition and Communication, 38(4), 397–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, E., Kao, C., & Ranney, M. (1998). Cognitive differences in proficient and nonproficient essay scorers. Written Communication, 15, 465–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C. S., Hu, G. W., & Zhang, L. J. (2014). Reactivity of concurrent verbal reporting in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 24(1), 51–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C. S., Zhang, L. J., & Parr, J. (2020). The reactivity of think-alouds in writing research: Quantitative and qualitative evidence from writing in English as a foreign language. Reading and Writing, 33(2), 451–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yanguas, I., & Lado, B. (2012). Is thinking aloud reactive when writing in the heritage language? Foreign Language Annals, 45, 380–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeari, M., & Lantin, S. (2021). The origin of centrality deficit in text memory and comprehension by poor comprehenders: A think-aloud study. Reading & Writing, 34, 595–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellermayer, M., & Cohen, J. (1996). Varying paths for learning to revise. Instructional Science, 24, 177–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L. J., & Zhang, D. L. (2020). Think-aloud protocols. In J. McKinley & H. Rose (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics (pp. 302–311). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann, R. (2000). L2 writing: Subprocesses, a model of formulating and empirical findings. Learning and Instruction, 10, 73–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of International Studies, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shaanxi, China

    Chengsong Yang

  2. Faculty of Education and Social Work, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

    Lawrence Jun Zhang

Authors
  1. Chengsong Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lawrence Jun Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Yang, C., Zhang, L.J. (2023). Introduction. In: Think-Aloud Protocols in Second Language Writing. English Language Education, vol 34. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39574-1_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39574-1_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-39573-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-39574-1

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation