Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T02:44:13.071Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ATTENTIONAL PROCESSING OF INPUT IN EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT CONDITIONS

An Eye-Tracking Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2016

Bimali Indrarathne  and
Judit Kormos
Bimali Indrarathne
Affiliation:
Lancaster University
Judit Kormos*
Affiliation:
Lancaster University
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Judit Kormos, Lancaster University, Department of Linguistics, Lancaster, LA1 4YL, United Kingdom. E-mail: j.kormos@lancaster.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this study we examined language learners’ attentional processing of a target syntactic construction in written L2 input in different input conditions, the change in learners’ knowledge of the targeted construction in these conditions, and the relationship between the change in knowledge and attentional processing. One hundred L2 learners of English in Sri Lanka were divided into four experimental groups and control group: input flood, input enhancement, a specific instruction to pay attention to the target grammatical construction in the input, and an explicit metalinguistic explanation of the target construction. Eye tracking was used to collect data on the attentional processing of 45 participants in the sample. The eye-tracking measures of learners who received a specific instruction to pay attention to the target structure and an explicit metalinguistic explanation indicated increased attentional processing. The learners in these groups also improved their knowledge of the target structure significantly. The results suggest that increased attentional processing is needed for development in L2 grammatical knowledge and that explicit instruction to pay attention to the input and metalinguistic explanation are successful in directing learners’ attentional resources toward novel grammatical constructions in the input.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 39 , Issue 3 , September 2017 , pp. 401 - 430
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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.)

Footnotes

We are grateful for the support of the EAP scholarship of Lancaster University that partly sponsored this research project and to our participants in Sri Lanka for offering their time. We also thank the reviewers for their particularly thorough and insightful comments and suggestions. All the materials used to collect data in this project are accessible in the IRIS digital repository (https://www.iris-database.org/). Primary data underlying this study is not available due to ethical concerns.

References

REFERENCES

Alanen, R. (1995). Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition. In Schmidt, R. (Ed.), Attention and awareness in second language acquisition (pp. 259–299). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Allport, A. (1993). Attention and control: Have we been asking the wrong questions? A critical review of twenty-five years. In Meyer, D. E. & Kornblum, S. (Eds.), Attention and performance: Synergies in experimental psychology, artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience (pp. 183–218). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Andringa, S., De Glopper, K., & Hacquebord, H. (2011). Effect of explicit and implicit instruction on free written response task performance. Language Learning, 61, 868–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bachman, T. (2006). A single metatheoretical framework for a number of conscious-vision phenomena. In Jing, Q., Rosenzweig, M. R., d’Ydewalle, G., Zhang, H., Chen, H., & Zhang, K. (Eds.), Psychological science around the world (pp. 229–242). Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1979). Explicit and implicit judgements of L2 grammaticality. Language Learning, 29, 81–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chun, M. M., Golomb, J. D., & Turk-Browne, N. B. (2011). A taxonomy of external and internal attention. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 73–101.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Coltheart, M., Curtis, B., Atkins, P., & Haller, M. (1993). Models of reading aloud: Dual-route and paralleled distribution processing approaches. Psychological Review, 100, 589–608.Google Scholar
Council of Europe (2011). Common European framework of reference for languages. Retrieved from http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_EN.pdf.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. (2001). Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206–257). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Issues and terminology. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 1–12). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305–352.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141–172.Google Scholar
Erickson, A. P. (2013). The ABCs of font: Effects of changing default fonts (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from Eastern Washington University Master’s Thesis Collection (Paper 108).Google Scholar
Gascoigne, C. (2006). Explicit input enhancement: Effects on target and non-target aspects of second language acquisition. Foreign Language Annals, 39, 551–564.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A., Loewen, S., Jung, S., Park, J. H., Gass, S., & Ellis, R. (2015). Timed and untimed grammaticality judgments measure distinct types of knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 269–297.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A., & Schmidtke, J. (2013). What do eye movements tell us about awareness? A triangulation of eye-movement data, verbal reports, and vocabulary learning scores. In Bergsleithner, J. M., Frota, S. N., & Yoshioka, J. K. (Eds.), Noticing and second language acquisition: Studies in honor of Richard Schmidt (pp. 183–205). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, National Foreign Language Resource Center.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A., & Uggen, M. S. (2013). Attention to irregular verbs by beginning learners of German: An eye-movement study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 291–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfroid, A., Boers, F., & Housen, A. (2013). An eye for word: Gauging the role of attention in incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition by means of eye-tracking. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 483–517.Google Scholar
Goo, J., Grañena, G., Yilmaz, Y., & Novella, M. (2015). Implicit and explicit instruction in L2 learning: Norris & Ortega (2000) revisited and updated. In Rebuschat, P. (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 443–482). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, X. (2013). The construct validity of grammaticality judgment tests as measures of implicit and explicit L2 knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 423–449.Google Scholar
Heatley, A., Nation, I. S. P., & Coxhead, A. (2002). Range and frequency programs. Retrieved from http://www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/staff/paul-nation.aspx.Google Scholar
Hernández, T. A. (2008). The effect of explicit instruction and input flood on students’ use of discourse markers on a simulated oral proficiency interview. Hispania, 91, 665–675.Google Scholar
Hunt, A. R., & Kingstone, A. (2003). Covert and overt voluntary attention: Linked or independent? Cognitive Brain Research, 18, 102–105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Issa, B., Morgan-Short, K., Villegas, B., & Raney, G. (2015). An eye-tracking study on the role of attention and its relationship with motivation. In Roberts, L., McManus, K., Vanek, N., & Trenkic, D. (Eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook 2015 (pp. 114–142). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamin Publishing.Google Scholar
Jahan, A., & Kormos, J. (2015). The impact of textual enhancement on EFL learners’ grammatical awareness of future plans and intentions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 25, 46–66.Google Scholar
Jourdenais, R., Ota, M., Stauffer, S., Boyson, B., & Doughty, C. (1995). Does textual enhancement promote noticing? A think aloud protocol analysis. In Schmidt, R. (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 183–216). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Centre.Google Scholar
Juan, C., Shorter-Jacobi, S., Schall, J., & Sperling, G. (2004). Dissociation of spatial attention and saccade preparation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101, 15541–15544.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koch, C., & Tsuchiya, N. (2006). Attention and consciousness: Two distinct brain processes. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 16–22.Google Scholar
Lamme, V. A. F. (2003). Why visual attention and awareness are different. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 12–18.Google Scholar
Lavie, N., Hirst, A., De Fockert, J. W., & Viding, E. (2004). Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 339–354.Google Scholar
Lee, S. K., & Huang, H. T. (2008). Visual input enhancement and grammar learning: A meta-analytic review. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 307–331.Google Scholar
Leow, R. (2001). 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.Google Scholar
Leow, R., Egi, T., Nuevo, A., & Tsai, Y. (2003). The roles of textual enhancement and type of linguistic item in adult L2 learners’ comprehension and intake. Applied Language Learning, 13, 1–16.Google Scholar
Liversedge, S., Gilchrist, I. D., & Everling, S. (2011). The Oxford handbook of eye movements. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Max Velmans, G. (2009). How to define consciousness—And how not to define consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 16, 139–156.Google Scholar
Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat? The Philosophical Review, 83, 435–450.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.Google Scholar
O’Regan, J. K., & Noe, A. (2001). A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 939–1031.Google Scholar
Overstreet, M. (1998). Text enhancement and content familiarity: The focus of learner attention. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 2, 229–258.Google Scholar
Radwan, A. A. (2005). The effectiveness of explicit attention to form in language learning. System, 33, 69–87.Google Scholar
Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2006). E–Z reader: A cognitive-control, serial-attention model of eye-movement behavior during reading. Cognitive Systems Research, 7, 4–22.Google Scholar
Reinders, H., & Ellis, R. (2009). The effects of two types of input on intake and the acquisition of implicit and explicit knowledge. In Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., & Reinders, H. (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 281–302). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (1995). Attention, memory and the noticing hypothesis. Language Learning, 45, 283–331.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (1997). Generalizability and automaticity of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 223–247.Google Scholar
Robinson, P., Mackey, A., Gass, S. M., & Schmidt, R. (2012). Attention and awareness in second language acquisition. In Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 247–267). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rosa, E., & O’Neill, M. (1999). Explicitness, intake and the issue of awareness: Another piece to the puzzle. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 511–566.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In Schmidt, R. (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1–63). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Centre.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (2010). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. In Chan, W. M., Chi, S., Cin, K. N., Istanto, J., Nagami, M., Sew, J. W., Suthiwan, T., & Walker, I. (Eds.), Proceedings of CLaSIC 2010, Singapore, December 2–4 (pp. 721–737). Singapore: National University of Singapore, Centre for Language Studies.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner. Second Language Research, 7, 118–132.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165–179.Google Scholar
Shiffrin, R. M. (1988). Attention. In Atkinson, R. A., Herrnstein, R. J., Lindzey, G., & Luce, R. D. (Eds.), Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology. Vol. 2: Learning and cognition (pp. 739–811). New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Shin-Cunningham, B. G. (2008). Object-based auditory and visual attention. Trends in Cognitive Science, 12, 182–186.Google Scholar
Shook, D. (1994). FL/L2 reading, grammatical information, and the input-to-intake phenomenon. Applied Language Learning, 52, 57–93.Google Scholar
Simard, D. (2009). Differential effects of textual enhancement formats on intake. System, 37, 124–135.Google Scholar
Simard, D., & Foucambert, D. (2013). Observing noticing while reading in L2. In Bergsleithner, J. M., Frota, S. N., & Yoshioka, J. K. (Eds.), Noticing and second language acquisition: Studies in honor of Richard Schmidt (pp. 207–226). Honolulu: National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawaii at Mānoa.Google Scholar
Smith, B. (2010). Employing eye-tracking technology in researching the effectiveness of recasts in CMC. In Hult, F. M. (Ed.), Directions and prospects for educational linguistics (pp. 79–97). New York, NY: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Smith, B. (2012). Eye tracking as a measure of noticing: A study of explicit recasts in SCMC. Language Learning & Technology, 16, 53–81.Google Scholar
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 263–308.Google Scholar
Styles, E. A. (2006). The psychology of attention (2nd ed.). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar
Tode, T. (2007). Durability problems with explicit instruction in an EFL context: The learning of the English copula be before and after the introduction of the auxiliary be. Language Teaching Research, 11, 11–30.Google Scholar
Tomlin, R., & Villa, H. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 183–203.Google Scholar
Trahey, M., & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and preemption in the second language classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 181–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Garnsey, S. M. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 285–318.Google Scholar
Truscott, J. (1998). Noticing in second language acquisition: A critical review. Second Language Research, 14, 103–135.Google Scholar
Truscott, J., & Sharwood Smith, M. (2011). Input, intake, and consciousness: The quest for a theoretical foundation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 497–528.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2002). Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning, 52, 755–803.Google Scholar
von Restorff, H. (1933). Über die Wirkung von Bereichsbildungen im Spurenfeld (the effects of field formation in the trace field). Psychological Research, 18, 299–342.Google Scholar
White, J. (1998). Getting the learner’s attention: A typographical input enhancement study. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 85–113). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wickens, C. D. (2007). Attention to attention and its applications: A concluding view. In Kramer, A. F., Wiegmann, D. A., & Kirlik, A. (Eds.), Attention: From theory to practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, M. P., & Garnsey, S. M. (2009). Making simple sentences hard: Verb bias effects in simple direct object sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 368–392.Google Scholar
Winke, P. M. (2013). The effects of input enhancement on grammar learning and comprehension: A modified replication of Lee (2007) with eye-movement data. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 323–352.Google Scholar
Winke, P., Gass, S., & Sydorenko, T. (2013). Factors influencing the use of captions by foreign language learners: An eye-tracking study. The Modern Language Journal, 97, 254–275.Google Scholar
Wolfe, J. M., & Horowitz, T. S. (2004). What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? Nature Reviews, 5, 1–7.Google Scholar
Wong, W. (2003). Textual enhancement and simplified input: Effects on L2 comprehension and acquisition of non-meaningful grammatical form. Applied Language Learning, 13, 109–132.Google Scholar
Zhang, R. H. (2014). Measuring university-level L2 Learners’ implicit and explicit linguistic knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 457–486.Google Scholar
Ziegler, J., & Goswami, U. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia and skilled reading across languages: A psycholinguistic grain size theory. Psychological Bulletin, 31, 3–29.Google Scholar