Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T14:11:20.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The use of eye-tracking in experimental approaches in second language acquisition research: the primary effects of Processing Instruction in the acquisition of the French imperfect

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2020

Cécile Laval  and
Harriet Lowe
Cécile Laval*
Affiliation:
University of Greenwich
Harriet Lowe
Affiliation:
University of Greenwich
*
Emails: C.Laval@gre.ac.uk, Harriet.Lowe@gre.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Despite the ample database of research findings on the benefits of Processing Instruction (PI), research thus has primarily made use of offline measures to establish how L2 learners comprehend and process sentences. Using online methodology, such as eye-tracking, allows research to more directly measure implicit knowledge. The sensitivity of these measures requires meticulous design choices to ensure validity and replicability. This study provides an overview of the linguistic and physical design considerations necessary for creating eye-tracking materials in SLA research. The present study demonstrates the application of these design considerations in an eye-tracking study, comparing the changes in processing patterns between two types of instruction: PI and Traditional Instruction (TI) on low intermediate L2 adult learners’ acquisition of the French imperfect aspect. The results of the experimental study show beneficial gains made by L2 learners who received PI on the French imperfect tense, this was seen in both a significant increase in accuracy scores from pre-test to post-test and change in their cognitive processing as shown by eye-movement data. The present study emphasizes the need for future studies to consider methodological reflections and key design principles in eye-tracking research.

Type
Article
Information
Journal of French Language Studies , Volume 30 , Issue 2: Methodological challenges in SLA: A focus on French , July 2020 , pp. 189 - 210
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2020

Access options

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

References

REFERENCES

Anuardi, M. N. A. M., Shinohara, H. and Yamazaki, A. K. (2016). A pre-study of background color effects on the working memory area of the brain. Procedia Computer Science, 96: 1172–1178.Google Scholar
Ayoun, D. (2005). The acquisition of tense and aspect in L2 French from a Universal Grammar perspective. In: Ayoun, D. and Salaberry, R. (eds), Tense and Aspect in Romance Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 79–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benati, A. (2001). A comparative study of the effects of processing instruction and output-based instruction on the acquisition of the Italian future tense. Language Teaching Researchg, 5: 95–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benati, A. (2005). The effects of PI, TI and MOI in the acquisition of English simple past tense. Language Teaching Research, 9: 67–113.Google Scholar
Benati, A., Lee, J. and Laval, C. (2008). From processing instruction on the acquisition of French Imparfait to secondary transfer-of-training with French causative subjunctive and to cumulative transfer-of-training effects with French causative constructions. In: Benati, A. and Lee, J. (eds), Grammar Acquisition and Processing Instruction: Secondary and Cumulative Effects. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, pp. 121–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benati, A. and Lee, J. (2015). Processing instruction: New insights after twenty years of theory, research and application. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 53 (2): 87–90.Google Scholar
Beymer, D., Orton, P. Z. and Russell, D. M. (2007). An eye-tracking study of how pictures influence online reading. In: Baranauskas, C., Palanque, P., Abascal, J., and Barbosa, S. D. J. (eds), Human-Computer Interaction - Interact 2007, LNCS 4663, Part II. Germany: International Federation for Information Processing, pp. 456–460.Google Scholar
Cadierno, T. (1995). Formal instruction in processing perspective: An investigation into the Spanish past tense. The Modern Language Journal, 79: 179–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, A. (2004). Processing instruction and Spanish ser and estar: Forms with semantic-aspectual value. In: VanPatten, B. (ed.), Processing Instruction: Theory, Research and Commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 119–141.Google Scholar
Conklin, K. and Pellicer-Sánchez, A. (2016). Using eye-tracking in applied linguistics and second language research. Second Language Research, 32 (3): 453–467.Google Scholar
Doherty, S. (2012). Investigating the effects of controlled language on the reading and comprehension of machine translated texts: A mixed-methods approach using eye tracking. PhD thesis, Dublin City University.Google Scholar
Elliot, A. and Maier, M. (2014). Color psychology: effects of perceiving color on psychological functioning in humans. Annual Review of Psychology, 65: 95–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farley, A. (2001). The effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 5: 57–94.Google Scholar
Farley, A. (2004). The relative effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction. In: VanPatten, B. (ed.), Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 143–168.Google Scholar
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2005). Eye-movements recording as a tool for studying syntactic: A review of methodologies and experimental findings. Second Language Research, 21 (2): 175–198.Google Scholar
Giorgi, A. and Pianesi, F. (1997). Tense and Aspect: From Semantics to Morphosyntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A. (2012). Eye tracking. In: Robinson, P. (ed.), The Routledge Enclopedia of Second Language Acquisition. New York and London: Routledge, pp. 234–236.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A., Boers, F. and Housen, A. (2013). An eye for words: gauging the role of attention in Iicidental L2 vocabulary acquisition by means of eye-tracking. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35 (3): 483–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Izquierdo, J. (2009). L’aspect lexical et le développement du passé composé et de l’imparfait en français L2: Une étude quantitative auprès d’apprenants hispanophones. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 65 (4): 587–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Izquierdo, J. and Collins, L. (2008). The facilitative role of L1 influence in tense-aspect marking: acomparison of Hispanophone and Anglophone learners of French. The Modern Language Journal, 92 (3): 350–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juhaz, B. J. and Rayner, K. (2006). The role of age of acquistion and word frequency in reading: Evidence from eye fixation durations. Visual Cognition, 13 (7–8): 846–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, G. D. and Jegerski, J. (2015). Experimental designs in sentence processing research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37 (1): 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laval, C. (2008). From processing instruction on the acquisition of French imparfait to secondary transfer-of-training effects on French subjunctive and to cumulative transfer-of-training effect with French causative. In: Benati, A. and Lee, J. (eds), Grammar Acquisition and Processing Instruction Secondary and Cumulative Effects. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, pp. 121–157.Google Scholar
Laval, C. (2011). Secondary and cumulative effects in attaining L2 proficiency in the classroom: the acquisition of French. In: Benati, A. (ed.), Issues in Second Language Proficiency. London, UK: Continuum, pp. 189–201.Google Scholar
Laval, C. (2013). The age factor on the primary, secondary and cumulative transfer-of-training effects of processing instruction on the acquisition of French as a second language. In: Lee, J. and Benati, A. (eds), Individual Differences and Processing Instruction. Sheffield: Equinox, pp. 105–130.Google Scholar
Lee, J. and Benati, A. (2007a). Delivering Processing Instruction in Classrooms and Virtual Contexts: Research and Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lee, J. and Benati, A. (2007b). Second Language Processing: an Analysis of Theory, Problems and Possible Solutions. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Lee, J., Benati, A., Aguilar-Sanchez, J. and McNulty, E. (2007). Comparing three modes of delivering PI on preterite/imperfect distinction and negative informal commands in Spanish. In: Lee, J. and Benati, A. (eds), Delivering Processing Instruction in Classrooms and in Virtual Contexts: Research and Practice. London: Equinox, pp. 74–98.Google Scholar
Lee, J. and Doherty, S. (2019). Native and nonnative processing of active and passive sentences: the effects of processing instruction on the allocation of visual attention. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41 (4): 853–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. and VanPatten, B. (2003). Making Communicative Language Teaching Happen (2nd ed). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Marsden, E. (2006). Exploring input processing in the Ccassroom: an experimental comparison of processing instruction and enriched input. Language Learning, 56 (3): 507–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsden, E., Mackey, A. and Plonsky, L. (2016). The IRIS repository: advancing research practice and methodology. In: Mackey, A. and Marsden, E. (eds), Advancing Methodology and Practice: The IRIS Repository of Instruments for Research into Second Languages. New York: Routledge, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
Rayner, K. and Duffy, S. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: effects on word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory and Cognition, 14 (3): 191–201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salabeery, R. and Ayoun, D. (2005). The development of L2 tense-aspect in the Romance Languages. In: Ayoun, D. and Salaberry, R. (eds), Tense and Aspect in Romance Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 1–33.Google Scholar
Spinner, P., Gass, S. M. and Behney, J. (2013). Ecological validity in eye-tracking. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35 (2): 389–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiffin-Richards, S. P. and Schroeder, S. (2015). Word length and frequency effects on children’s eye movements during silent reading. Vision Research, 113: 33–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Toth, P. D. (2006). Processing instruction and a role for output in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 56: 316–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uludag, O. and VanPatten, B. (2012). The comparative effects of processing instruction and dictogloss on the acquisition of the English passive by speakers of Turkish. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 50: 189–212.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input Processing and Grammar Instruction in Second Language Acquisition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2004a). Input processing in second language acquisition. In: VanPatten, B. (ed.), Processing Instruction: Theory, Research and Commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2004b). Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2007). Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In: VanPatten, B. and Williams, J. (eds), Theories in Second Language Acquisition. London, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 113–134.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2015a). Foundations of processing instruction. In: Benati, A. and Lee, J. (eds), International Review of Applied Linguistics. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 91–110.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2015b). Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In: VanPatten, B. and Williams, J. (eds), Theories in Second Language Acquisition (2nd ed). London: Erlbaum, pp. 113–134.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. and Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15: 225–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. and Jegerski, J. (2014). Research Methods in Second Language Psycholinguistics. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. and Wong, W. (2004). Processing instruction and the French causative: another replication. In: Processing Instruction: Theory, Research and Commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 97–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, R. S. and Morris, R. K. (2004). Eye movements, word familiarity and vocabulary acquisiton. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16 (1–2): 312–339.Google Scholar
Wong, W. and Ito, K. (2017). The effects of processing instruction and traditional instruction on L2 online Processing of the causative construction in French: an eye-tracking study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40 (2): 241–268.Google Scholar