Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T23:12:31.132Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Toward operationalizing the process of attention in SLA: Evidence for Tomlin and Villa's (1994) finegrained analysis of attention

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Ronald P. Leow
Ronald P. Leow*
Affiliation:
Georgetown University
*
Department.of Spanish and Portuguese, ICC 403, Georgetown University, 37th and O Streets, NW, Washington, DC 20057. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates, from a task-based approach and at a morphological level, Tomlin and Villa's (1994) fine-grained analysis of attention in second language acquisition. Four groups of beginning learners of Spanish completed one of four crossword puzzles designed to isolate the effects of alertness, orientation, and detection. Repeated-measures ANOVAs performed on the raw scores obtained on the pretest and three posttests of a recognition and written production task revealed significant main effects for type of attentional function, time, and significant interactions. The results lend strong empirical support to Tomlin and Villa's (1994) fine-grained analysis of attention while indicating short-term effects of detection.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , January 1998 , pp. 133 - 159
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

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

Anderson, J. (1985). Cognitive psychology and its implications (2nd ed.). New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1978). A theoretical model of second language acquisition. Language Learning, 28,69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1990). The competence of processing: Classifying theories of second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 635–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1994). Analysis and control in the development of second language proficiency. Studies in Sec-ond Language Acquisition, 16, 157–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadiemo, T. (1995). Formal instruction from a processing perspective: An investigation into theSpanish past tense. Modern Language Journal, 79, 179–193.Google Scholar
Carr, T. H. & Curran, T. (1994). Cognitive factors in learning about structured sequences: Applica-tions to syntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 205–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, S., Roberge, Y. & Swain, M. (1992). The role of feedback in adult second language acquisition:Error correction and morphological generalizations. Applied Psycholinguistics. 13, 173–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, A. D. (1987). Using verbal reports in research on language learning. In Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Introspection in second language research (pp. 82–95). Clevedon: Multilin-gual Matters.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. (1991). Second language instruction does make a difference. Studies in Second Lan-guage Acquisition, 13, 431–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (1993). The structural syllabus and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 27,91–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, K. & Simon, H. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, K. & Simon, H. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (2nd ed.). Boston: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (1980). Process and strategies in foreign language learning and communi-cation. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin - Utrecht, 5, 47–118.Google Scholar
Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (Eds.). (1987). Introspection in second language research. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Fotos, S. (1993). Consciousness raising and noticing through focus on form: Grammar task perfor-mance versus formal instruction. Applied Linguistics, 14, 385–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fotos, S. & Ellis, R. (1991). Communicating about grammar: A task-based approach. TESOL Quar-terly, 25, 605–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. (1988). Integrating research areas: A framework for second language studies. Applied Lin-guistics, 9, 198–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, J. R. & Flowers, L. (1983). Uncovering cognitive processes in writing. In Mosenthal, P. et al. (Eds.), Research in writing: Principles and methods (pp. 207–220). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (1989). Implicit and incidental second language learning: Experiments in the process-ing of natural and partially artificial input. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M.. (Eds.), Interlin-gual processes (pp. 49–73). Tubingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. & Schmidt, R. W. (1994). Guest editors’ introduction. AILA Review, 11, 5–10.Google Scholar
Jourdenais, R., Ota, M., Stauffer, S., Boyson, B. & Doughty, C. (1995). Does textual enhancementpromote noticing? A think aloud protocol analysis. In Schmidt, R. W. (Ed.), Attention andawareness in foreign language learning (Technical Report No. 9, pp. 183–216). Honolulu: University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. & Treisman, A. (1984). Changing views of attention and automaticity. In Parasur-aman, R. & Davies, D. R. (eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 29–61). Orlando, FL: Academic.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford, NY: Per-gamon.Google Scholar
Lachman, R., Lachman, J. L. & Butterfield, E. C. (1979). Cognitive psychology and informationprocessing: An introduction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Leow, R. P. (1995). Modality and intake in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Lan-guage Acquisition, 17, 79–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leow, R. P. (1993). To simplify or not to simplify: A look at intake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 75, 333–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leow, R. P. (1997). Attention, awareness, and foreign language behavior. Language Learning, 47, 467–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leow, R. P. (forthcoming). The effects of amount and type of exposure on adult learners' L2 development in SLA. Modem Language Journal, 82.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. M. & Spada, N. M. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communica-tive language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition, 12, 429–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. M., Spada, N. M. & Wallace, R. (1980). Some effects of instruction on child andadolescent ESL learners. In Scarcella, R. C. & Krashen, S. D (Eds.), Research in secondlanguage acquisition (pp. 162–172). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1988). Instructed interlanguage development In Beebe, L. (Ed.), Issues in secondlanguage acquisition: Multiple perspectives (pp. 115–141). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In de Bot, K.Ginsberg, R. B. & Kramsch, C. (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39–52). Philadelphia: Johns Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. & Crookes, G. (1993). Units of analysis in syllabus design: The case for task. In Crookes, G. & Gass, S. M. (Eds.), Tasks in a pedagogical context: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 9–54). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Loschky, L. & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. In Crookes, G. & Gass, S. M. (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 123–167). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, B., Rossman, T.. & McLeod, B. (1983). Second-language teaming: An information-processing perspective. Language Learning, 33, 135–158.Google Scholar
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nunan, D. (1993). Task-based syllabus design: Selecting, grading and sequencing tasks. In Crookes, G. & Gass, S. M. (Eds.), Tasks in a pedagogical context: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 55–68). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Posner, M. I. & Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Reviewof Neuroscience, 13, 25–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, P. (1995). Attention, memory and the “noticing” hypothesis. Language Learning, 45,283–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, II, 129–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. W. (1993). Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 206–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. W. (1994). Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. AILA Review, II, 11–26.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. W. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention andawareness in learning. In Schmidt, R. W. (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign languagelearning (Technical Report No. 9, pp. 1–63). Honolulu: University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Seliger, H. W. (1983). The language learner as a linguist: Of metaphors and realities. AppliedLinguistics, 4, 179–191.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M., (1981). Consciousness-raising and the second language learner. Applied Lin-guistics, 2, 159–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M., (1986). Comprehension vs. acquisition: Two ways of processing input. Applied Linguistics, 7, 239–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M., (1991). Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information forthe L2 learner. Second Language Research, 17, 118–136.Google Scholar
Shook, D. J. (1994). FL/L2 reading, grammatical information, and the input-to-intake phenomenon. Applied Language Learning, 5, 57–93.Google Scholar
Spada, N. M & Lightbown, P. M. (1993). Instruction and the development of questions in L2 classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 205–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomlin, R. S. & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 183–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trahey, M. & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and preemption in the second language class-room. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 181–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1995). Cognitive aspects of input processing in second language acquisition. In Hashemipour, P.Maldonaldo, R. & van Naerssen, M. (Eds.), Studies in language teaming and Spanish linguis-tics: In honor of Tracy D. Terrell (pp. 170–183). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. & Cadiemo, T. (1993). Input processing and second language acquisition: A role forinstruction. Modern Language Journal, 77, 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. & Sanz, C. (1995). From input to output: Processing instruction and communicativetasks. In Eckman, F., Highland, D., Lee, P., Mileham, J., & Rutkowski Weber, R. (Eds.), Secondlanguage acquisition: Theory and pedagogy (pp. 169–185). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
White, L. (1991). Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language Research, 7. 133–161.Google Scholar
White, L., Spada, N. M., Lightbown, P. M. & Ranta, L. (1991). Input enhancement and second language question formation. Applied Linguistics, 4, 416–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wickens, C. D. (1978). The structure of attentional resources. In Nickerson, R. S. (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 239–257). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Wickens, C. D. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In Parasuraman, R. & Davies, D. R. (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 63–102). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Wickens, C. D. (1989). Attention and skilled performance. In Holding, D. H. (Ed.), Human skilb (pp. 71–105). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar