The effects of task design variables and corrective feedback on EFL learners’ writing complexity and accuracy

References

• Abdi Tabari, M., Lu, X., & Wang, Y. (2023). The effects of task complexity on lexical complexity in L2 writing: An exploratory study. System, 114, 103021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103021
   Web of Science ®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(4), 689–725. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263113000429
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baralt, M., Gilabert, R., & Robinson, P. (2014). An introduction to theory and research in task sequencing and instructed second language learning. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert, & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning (pp. 1–34). Bloomsbury. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472593665.ch-001
   Google Scholar
• Bueno-Alastuey, M. C., Vasseur, R., & Elola, I. (2022). Effects of collaborative writing and peer feedback on Spanish as a foreign language writing performance. Foreign Language Annals, 55(2), 517–539. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12611
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrnes, H., & Manchón, R. M. (2014). Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing: An introduction. In H. Byrnes & R. M. Manchón (Eds.), Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing. (pp. 1–23). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.7
   Google Scholar
• Candlin, C. N. (1987). Towards task-based learning. In C. Chistopher & M. Dermot (Eds.), Language learning tasks. Lancaster practical papers in English language education (pp. 5–22) Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Carless, D. (2012). TBLT in EFL settings: Looking back and moving forward. In A. Shehadeh & C. A. Coombe (Eds.), Task-based language teaching in foreign language contexts (pp. 345–358). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.4
   Google Scholar
• Carr, N., & Weinmann, M. (2018). Written corrective feedback: The need for collaboration and multidirectional interaction. TESOL in Context, 27(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.21153/tesol2018vol27no1art770770
   Google Scholar
• Carson, J. (2001). Second language writing and second language acquisition. In T. Silva & P. Matsuda (Eds.), On second language writing (pp. 191–200). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410600899
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587
   Google Scholar
• Cook, V. (2009). Developing links between second language acquisition research and language teaching. In K. Knapp & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), The handbook of foreign language communication and learning (pp. 139–161). de Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214246
   Google Scholar
• Cumming, A. (2001). Learning to write in a second language: Two decades of research. International Journal of English Studies, 1(2), 1–23. https://revistas.um.es/ijes/article/view/48331
   Google Scholar
• DiCamilla, F., & Anton, M. (1997). Repetition in the collaborative discourse of L2 learners: A Vygotskian perspective. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(4), 609–633. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.53.4.609
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33–56). Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. (1990). Singular texts/plural authors. Southern Illinois University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(1), 59–84. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104026130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flower, L. S., & Hayes, J. R. (1980). The dynamic of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 31–50). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315630274
   Google Scholar
• Frear, M. W., & Bitchener, J. (2015). The effects of cognitive task complexity on writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• García Mayo, M. P. (Ed.) (2007). Investigating tasks in formal language learning. Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Gilabert, R. (2007). Effects of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 oral production. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 215–240. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2007.010
   Google Scholar
• Golparvar, S. E., & Rashidi, F. (2021). The effect of task complexity on integrated writing performance: The case of multiple-text source-based writing. System, 99, 102524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102524
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granena, G., & Yilmaz, Y. (2021). Corrective feedback and grammatical complexity: A research synthesis. In H. Nassaji & E. Kartchava (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching (pp. 754–776). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108589789
   Google Scholar
• Halford, G. S., Cowan, N., & Andrews, G. (2007). Separating cognitive capacity from knowledge: A new hypothesis. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(6), 236–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.04.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (Eds.). (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742
   Google Scholar
• Ishikawa, T. (2007). The effect of manipulating task complexity along the [+/–Here-and-Now] dimension on L2 written narrative discourse. In M. P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 157–176). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853599286-010
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, M. D. (2017). Cognitive task complexity and L2 written syntactic complexity, accuracy, lexical complexity, and fluency: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 37, 13–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kassim, A., & Luan, N. (2014). The roles of collaborative dialogue in enhancing written corrective feedback efficacy. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 10(1), 16–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819831406
   Google Scholar
• Kim, Y. (2022). Effects of task complexity on EFL learners’ writing behaviors and performance. English Teaching, 77(4), 49–69. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.77.4.202212.49
   Google Scholar
• Kim, Y. (2012). Task complexity, learning opportunities, and Korean EFL learners’ question development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(4), 627–658. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000368
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kormos, J. (2011). Task complexity and linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 148–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. (1992). An introduction to second language acquisition research. Longman. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315835891
   Google Scholar
• Lee, Y. (2002). Effects of task complexity on the complexity and accuracy of oral production in L2 Korean [Unpublished PhD dissertation]. University of Hawaii at Manoa.
   Google Scholar
• Long, M. (1985). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language training. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modelling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 77–100). Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Manchón, R. M. (2014). The internal dimension of tasks: The interaction between task factors and learner factors in bringing about learning through writing. In H. Byrnes & R. M. Manchón (Eds.), Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 27–53). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.7.02man
   Google Scholar
• Meshkat, M., & Ghasemi, M. (2021). The effect of collaborative writing on syntactic complexity and attitudes towards writing in a blended learning environment: A quasi-experimental study. International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies, 9(3), 46–57. http://www.eltsjournal.org/archive/value9%20issue3/6-9-3-21.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Michel, M., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007). The influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch L2. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 241–259. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2007.011
   Google Scholar
• Mujtaba, S. M., Reynolds, B. L., Parkash, R., & Singh, M. K. M. (2021). Individual and collaborative processing of written corrective feedback affects second language writing accuracy and revision. Assessing Writing, 50, 100566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2021.100566
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nuevo, A. (2006). Task complexity and interaction: L2 learning opportunities and development. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Georgetown University. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.5160.0807
   Google Scholar
• Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667336
   Google Scholar
• Ohta, A. S. (2005). Interlanguage pragmatics in the zone of proximal development. System, 33(3), 503–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2005.06.001
   Google Scholar
• Ong, J., & Zhang, L. J. (2010). Effects of task complexity on the fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students’ argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 218–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahimi, M., & Zhang, L. J. (2017). Effects of task complexity and planning conditions on L2 argumentative writing production. Discourse Processes, 55(8), 726–742. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2017.1336042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Révész, A. (2009). Task complexity, focus on form, and second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31(3), 437–470. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109090366
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Révész, A., & Han, Z. (2006). Task content familiarity, task type and efficacy of recasts. Language Awareness, 15(3), 160–179. https://doi.org/10.2167/la401.0
   Google Scholar
• Révész, A., Kourtali, N. E., & Mazgutova, D. (2017). Effects of task complexity on L2 writing behaviors and linguistic complexity. Language Learning, 67(1), 208–241. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Révész, A., Sachs, R., & Hama, M. (2014). The effects of task complexity and input frequency on the acquisition of the past counterfactual construction through recasts. Language Learning, 64(3), 615–650. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, P. (2001). 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. 285–316). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.1.12tas
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, P. (2003). The cognition hypothesis, task design, and adult task-based language learning. Second Language Studies, 21(2), 45–105.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, P. (2007). Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In M. P. Garcia-Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language settings (pp. 7–26). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853599286-004
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, P. (2009). Syllabus design. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of second and foreign language teaching (pp. 294–310). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492
   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(3), 497–538. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00163
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiz-Funes, M. (2014). Task complexity and linguistic performance in advanced college-level foreign language writing. In H. Byrnes & R. M. Manchon (Eds.), Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 163–192). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.7.07rui
   Google Scholar
• Sang, Z., & Zou, W. (2023). The effect of joint production on the accuracy and complexity of second language writing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 52(2), 425–443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-022-09882-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sasayama, S. (2011). Cognition hypothesis and second language performance: Comparison of written and oral task performance. Second Language Studies, 29(2), 107–129. http://www.hawaii.edu/sls/sls/wp-content/uploads/3-Sasayama-Shoko1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 255–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 38–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.1.38
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Skehan, P. (2009). Modeling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510–532. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skehan, P. (2014). The context for researching a processing perspective on task performance. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 1–26). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5.01ske
   Google Scholar
• Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49(1), 93–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Storch, N. (2016). Collaborative writing. In R. M. Manchón & P. K. Matsuda (Eds.), The handbook of second and foreign language writing (pp. 387–406). de Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614511335
   Google Scholar
• Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2007). Writing tasks: Comparing individual and collaborative writing. In M. P. Garcia-Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 157–177). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853599286
   Google Scholar
• Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensive output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Newbury House.
   Google Scholar
• Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step toward second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/16.3.371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavakoli, P., & Skehan, P. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure and performance testing. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 239–277). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11
   Google Scholar
• Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Compernolle, R. A. (2014). Sociocultural theory and L2 instructional pragmatics. Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Van den Branden, K. (2006). Training teachers: Task-based as well? In K. Van den Branden (Ed.), Task-based language education: From theory to practice (pp. 217–248). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12(3), 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100009177
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, Z. (2014). Task structure, time perspective and lexical demands during video-based narrative retellings. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 155–186). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5
   Google Scholar
• Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2009). Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. Language Testing, 26(3), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209104670
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willing, K. (1994). Learning strategies in adult migrant education. National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, R. E. (1986). Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37(1), 60–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(86)90044-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, R. (1995). Conversational styles in language proficiency interviews. Language Learning, 45(1), 3–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00961.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar