The impact of mobile-assisted peer feedback on EFL learners’ speaking performance and anxiety: does language make a difference?

References

• Ahmadi, A. and E. Sadeghi. 2016. Assessing English language learner's oral performance: a comparison of monologue, interview and group oral test. Language Assessment Quarterly 13, no. 4: 341–58. DOI: 10.1080/15434303.2016.1236797.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aubrey, S., C. Lambert and P. Leeming. 2020. The impact of first as opposed to second language pre-task planning on the content of problem-solving task performance. Language Teaching Research. DOI: 10.1177/1362168820917844.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bao, R. 2019. Oral corrective feedback in L2 Chinese classes: teachers’ beliefs versus their practices. System 82: 140–50. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2019.04.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baralt, M. and L. Gurzynski-Weiss. 2011. Comparing learners’ state anxiety during task-based interaction in computer-mediated and face-to-face communication. Language Teaching Research 15, no. 2: 201–29. DOI: 10.1177/0265532210388717.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bashori, M., R. van Hout, H. Strik, and C. Cucchiarini. 2020. Web-based language learning and speaking anxiety. Computer Assisted Language Learning. DOI: 10.1080/09588221.2020.1770293.
   Google Scholar
• Bonk, C.J., and D.J. Cunningham. 1998. Searching for learner-centered, constructivist, and socio-cultural components of collaborative educational learning tools. In Electronic Collaborators: Learner-Centered Technologies for Literacy, Apprenticeship, and Discourse, eds. C.J. Bonk and K.S. King, 25–50. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Bosmans, D. and S. Hurd. 2016. Phonological attainment and foreign language anxiety in distance language learning: a quantitative approach. Distance Education 37, no. 3: 287–301. DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2016.1233049.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bower, J. and S. Kawaguchi. 2011. Negotiation of meaning and corrective feedback in Japanese/English eTandem. Language Learning & Technology 15, no. 1: 41–71. http://llt.msu.edu/issues/february2011/bowerkawaguchi.pdf.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, D. 2016. The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: a meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research 20, no. 4: 436–58. DOI: 10.1177/1362168814563200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruen, J. and Y. Kelly. 2017. Using a shared L1 to reduce cognitive overload and anxiety levels in the L2 classroom. The Language Learning Journal 45, no. 3: 368–81. DOI: 10.1080/09571736.2014.908405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chou, M.H. 2018. Speaking anxiety and strategy use for learning English as a foreign language in full and partial English-medium instruction contexts. TESOL Quarterly 52, no. 3: 611–33. DOI: 10.1002/tesq.455.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, L., L. Manion and K. Morrison. 2007. Research Methods in Education. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, G. 2010. Translation in Language Teaching: An Argument for Reassessment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Côté, S. and C. Gaffney. 2018. The effect of synchronous computer-mediated communication on beginner L2 learners’ foreign language anxiety and participation. The Language Learning Journal. DOI: 10.1080/09571736.2018.1484935.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Couper, G. 2019. Teachers’ cognitions of corrective feedback on pronunciation: their beliefs, perceptions and practices. System 84: 41–52. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2019.04.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell, J.W., V.L. Plano Clark, M. Gutmann and W. Hanson. 2003. Advanced mixed methods research designs. In Handbook on Mixed Methods in the Behavioral and Social Sciences, eds. A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie, 209–40. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• De Bot, K. 1992. A bilingual processing model: Levelt's ‘speaking’ model adapted. Applied Linguistics 13, no. 1: 1–24. DOI: 10.1093/applin/13.1.1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delaney, T. 2009. Individual differences, participation, and language acquisition in communicative EFL classes in a Japanese university. (PhD diss.), Auckland University, Auckland.
   Google Scholar
• Dewaele, J.M. 2007. Predicting language learners’ grades in the L1, L2, L3, and L4: the effect of some psychological and sociocognitive variables. International Journal of Multilingualism 4, no. 3: 169–97. DOI: 10.2167/ijm080.0.
   Google Scholar
• Dewaele, J.M. and P.D. MacIntyre. 2016. Foreign language enjoyment and foreign language classroom anxiety: the right and left feet of the language learner. In Positive Psychology in SLA, eds. P.D. MacIntyre, T. Gregersen and S. Mercer, 215–36. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Diab, N.M. 2016. A comparison of peer, teacher and self-feedback on the reduction of language errors in student essays. System 57: 55–65. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2015.12.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dochy, F., M. Segers and D. Sluijsmans. 1999. The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: a review. Studies in Higher Education 24, no. 3: 331–50. DOI: 10.1080/03075079912331379935.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis, R. 2008. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, R., S. Loewen and R. Erlam. 2006. Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28, no. 2: 339–68. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263106060141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, W., F.A. Cassim, C. Hsu and N. Chen. 2018. Effects of reciprocal peer feedback on EFL learners’ communication strategy use and oral communication performance. Smart Learning Environments 5, no. 11. DOI: 10.1186/s40561-018-0061-2.
   Google Scholar
• Ferris, D. 2002. Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gass, S. and L. Selinker. 1983. Language Transfer in Language Learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
   Google Scholar
• Ghahari, S. and M. Sadeghat. 2018. Optimal feedback structure and interactional pattern in formative peer practices: students’ beliefs. System 74: 9–20. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2018.02.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goo, J. and A. Mackey. 2013. The case against the case against recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 35, no. 1: 127–65. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263112000708.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregersen, T.S. 2003. To err is human: a reminder to teachers of language-anxious students. Foreign Language Annals 36, no. 1: 25–32. DOI: 10.1111/j.19449720.2003.tb01929.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregersen, T. and P.D. Maclntyre. 2014. Capitalizing on Language Learners’ Individuality: From Premise to Practice. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Guo, Y., J. Xu and X. Liu. 2018. English language learners’ use of self-regulatory strategies for foreign language anxiety in China. System 76: 49–61. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2018.05.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hewitt, E. and J. Stephenson. 2012. Foreign language anxiety and oral exam performance: a replication of phillips’s MLJ study. The Modern Language Journal 96, no. 2: 170–89. DOI: 10.1111/j.15404781.2011.01174.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horwitz, E.K. 2001. Language anxiety and achievement. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 21: 112–26. DOI: 10.1017/S0267190501000071.
   Google Scholar
• Horwitz, E.K. 2017. On the misreading of Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope (1986) and the need to balance anxiety research and the experiences of anxious language learners. In New Insights Into Language Anxiety: Theory, Research and Educational Implications, eds. C. Gkonou, M. Daubney and J.M. Dewaele, 31–50. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Horwitz, E.K., M.B. Horwitz, and J. Cope. 1986. Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal 70, 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1986.tb05256.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyland, K. 2003. Second Language Writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jin, Y.X. and J.M. Dewaele. 2018. The effect of positive orientation and perceived social support on foreign language classroom anxiety. System 74: 149–57. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2018.01.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanuka, H. and T. Anderson. 2007. Online social interchange, discord, and knowledge construction. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education 13, no. 1: 57–74. http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/137.
   Google Scholar
• Kern, R. 1995. Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal 79, no. 4: 457–476. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05445.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khoram, A. 2019. The impact of task type and pre-task planning condition on the accuracy of intermediate EFL learners’ oral performance. Cogent Education 6, no. 1. DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2019.1675466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kötter, M. 2003. Negotiation of meaning and codeswitching in online tandems. Language Learning & Technology 7, no. 2: 145–74. http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/kotter/.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, I. 2008. Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing 17, no. 3: 144–64. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.12.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, M.K. 2015. Peer feedback in second language writing: investigating junior secondary students’ perspectives on inter-feedback and intra-feedback. System 55. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2015.08.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, M.K. and M. Evans. 2019. Investigating the operating mechanisms of the sources of L2 writing self-efficacy at the stages of giving and receiving peer feedback. The Modern Language Journal 103, no. 4: 831–47. DOI: 10.1111/modl.12598.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, S. 2010. The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: a meta-analysis. Language Learning 60, no. 2: 309–65. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loretto, A., S. DeMartino and A. Godley. 2016. Secondary students’ perceptions of peer review of writing. Research in the Teaching of English 51, no. 2: 134–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyster, R. and L. Ranta. 2013. Counterpoint piece: the case for variety in corrective feedback research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 35, no. 1: 167–84. DOI: 10.1017/S027226311200071X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyster, R. and K. Saito. 2010. Oral feedback in classroom SLA: a meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32, no. 2: 265–302. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263109990520.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macaro, E. 2005. Codeswitching in the L2 classroom: a communication and learning strategy. In Non-Native Language Teachers: Perceptions, Challenges, and Contributions to the Profession, ed. E. Llurda, 63–84. Boston, MA: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Macaro, E. 2009. Teacher use of codeswitching in the second language classroom: exploring ‘optimal’ use. In First Language Use in Second and Foreign Language Learning, eds. M. Turnbull and J. Dailey-O'Cain, 35–49. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• MacIntyre, P.D. 2017. An overview of language anxiety research and trends in its development. In New Insights Into Language Anxiety: Theory, Research and Educational Implications, eds. C. Gkonou, M. Daubney and J.M. Dewaele, 11–30. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• MacIntyre, P.D., and R.C Gardner. 1991. Methods and results in the study of anxiety and language learning: a review of the literature. Language Learning 41, no. 1: 85–117. DOI: 10.1111/j.14671770.1991.tb00677.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacIntyre, P.D. and R.C. Gardner. 1994. The subtle effects of language anxiety on cognitive processing in the second language. Language Learning 44, no. 2: 283–305. DOI: 10.1111/j.14671770.1994.tb01103.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, S. and. M.A. Valdivia. 2017. Students’ feedback beliefs and anxiety in online foreign language oral tasks. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 14, no. 18. DOI: 10.1186/s41239-017-0056-z.
   Google Scholar
• Martínez, J. 2014. An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal 15, no. 2: 265–78. DOI: 10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2013.2.a08.
   Google Scholar
• Musk, N. 2010. Code-switching and code-mixing in Welsh bilinguals' talk: confirming or refuting the maintenance of language boundaries? Language, Culture and Curriculum 23, no. 3: 179–97. DOI: 10.1080/07908318.2010.515993.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nassaji, H. and E. Kartchava, eds. 2017. Corrective Feedback in Second Language Teaching and Learning. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Netz, H. and O. Fogel. 2019. Input-providing vs. output-pushing corrective feedback in dyadic tutoring sessions. System 87. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2019.102159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozogul, G. and H. Sullivan. 2009. Student performance and attitudes under formative evaluation by teacher, self- and peer-evaluators. Educational Technology Research and Development 57: 393–410. DOI: 10.1007/s11423-007-9052-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öztürk, G. and N. Gürbüz. 2014. Speaking anxiety among Turkish EFL learners: the case at a state university. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 10, no. 1: 1–17. DOI: 10.17263/JLLS.13933.
   Google Scholar
• Park, E. 2013. Learner-generated noticing behaviour by novice learners: tracing the effects of learners’ L1 on their emerging L2. Applied Linguistics 34, no. 1: 74–98. DOI: 10.1093/applin/ams016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rassaei, E. 2019. Computer-mediated text-based and audio-based corrective feedback, perceptual style and L2 development. System 82: 97–110. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2019.03.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruegg, R. 2015. The relative effects of peer and teacher feedback on improvement in EFL students’ writing ability. Linguistics and Education 29, no. 2: 73–82. DOI: 10.1016/j.linged.2014.12.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruegg, R. 2018. The effect of peer and teacher feedback on changes in EFL students’ writing self-efficacy. The Language Learning Journal 46, no. 2: 87–102. DOI: 10.1080/09571736.2014.958190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russell, J. and N. Spada. 2006. The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar. Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching, 133–64. DOI: 10.1075/lllt.13.09val.
   Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-González, E. and M.E. Castañeda. 2018. The effects and perceptions of trained peer feedback in L2 speaking: impact on revision and speaking quality. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 12, no. 2: 120–36. http://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2015.1108978.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadighi, F. and M. Dastpak. 2017. The sources of foreign language speaking anxiety of Iranian English language learners. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies 5, no. 4: 111–5. DOI: 10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.5n.4p.111.
   Google Scholar
• Sagarra, N. and R. Abbuhl. 2013. Optimizing the noticing of recasts via computer-delivered feedback: evidence that oral input enhancement and working memory help second language learning. The Modern Language Journal 97, no. 1: 196–216. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.01427.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sato, M. and S. Loewen. 2018. Metacognitive instruction enhances the effectiveness of corrective feedback: variable effects of feedback types and linguistic targets. Language Learning 68, no. 2: 507–45. DOI: 10.1111/lang.12283.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheen, Y. 2010. Differential effects of oral and written corrective feedback in the ESL classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32, no. 2: 203–34. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263109990507.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shintani, N. 2016. The effects of computer-mediated synchronous and asynchronous direct corrective feedback on writing: a case study. Computer Assisted Language Learning 29, no. 3: 517–38. DOI: 10.1080/09588221.2014.993400.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shintani, N. and S. Aubrey. 2016. The effectiveness of synchronous and asynchronous written corrective feedback on grammatical accuracy in a computer-mediated environment. The Modern Language Journal 100, no. 1: 296–319. DOI: 10.1111/modl.12317.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sivan, A. 2000. The implementation of peer assessment: an action research approach. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 7, no. 2: 193–213. DOI: 10.1080/713613328.
   Google Scholar
• Spernes, K. 2012. ‘I use my mother tongue at home and with friends - not in school!’ Multilingualism and identity in rural Kenya. Language, Culture and Curriculum 25, no. 2: 189–203. DOI: 10.1080/07908318.2012.683531.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spielmann, G. and M. L. Radnofsky. 2001. Learning language under tension: new directions from a qualitative study. The Modern Language Journal 85, no. 2: 259–78. DOI: 10.1111/0026-7902.00108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steendam, E. V., G. Rijlaarsdam, L. Sercu and H. V. Bergh. 2010. The effect of instruction type and dyadic or individual emulation on the quality of higher-order peer feedback in EFL. Learning and Instruction 20, no. 4: 316–27. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Storch, N. and A. Aldosari. 2010. Learners’ use of first language (Arabic) in pair work in an EFL class. Language Teaching Research 14, no. 4: 355–75. DOI: 10.1177/1362168810375362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swain, M. and S. Lapkin. 2000. Task-based second language learning: the uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research 4, no. 3: 251–74. DOI: 10.1177/136216880000400304.
   Google Scholar
• Teimouri, Y., J. Goetze and L. Plonsky. 2019. Second language anxiety and achievement: a meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 41, no. 2: 489–9. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263119000445.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tian, L. and Y. Zhou. 2020. Learner engagement with automated feedback, peer feedback and teacher feedback in an online EFL writing context. System 91. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2020.102247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topping, K.J. 2009. Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice 48, no. 1: 20–7. DOI: 10.1080/00405840802577569.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Truscott, J. 1996. The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning 46, no. 2: 327–69. DOI: 10.1111/j.14671770.1996.tb01238.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tudini, V. 2003. Using native speakers in chat. Language Learning & Technology 7, no. 3: 141–59. http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num3/tudini/.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turnbull, M. and J. Dailey-O'Cain. 2009. Introduction. In First Language use in Second and Foreign Language Learning, eds. M. Turnbull and J. Dailey-O'Cain, 1–14. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Warner, R. and J. Miller. 2015. Cultural dimensions of feedback at an Australian university: a study of international students with English as an additional language. Higher Education Research and Development 34, no. 2: 420–35. DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2014.956695.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodrow, L. 2006. Anxiety and speaking English as a second language. RELC Journal 37, no. 3: 308–28. DOI: 10.1177/0033688206071315.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, L. 2014. Examining the mediational means in collaborative writing: case studies of undergraduate ESL students in business courses. Journal of Second Language Writing 23: 74–89. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2014.01.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, J. 2016. Learners’ oral corrective feedback preferences in relation totheir cultural background, proficiency level and types of error. System 61: 75–86. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2016.08.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, M., R. Badger and Z. Yu. 2006. A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing 15, no. 3: 179–200. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yanguas, Í. 2010. Oral computer-mediated interaction between L2 learners: it's about time!. Language Learning & Technology 14, no. 3: 72–93. http://llt.msu.edu/vol14num3/yanguas.pdf.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeh, H.C., S.S. Tseng and Y.S. Chen. 2019. Using online peer feedback through blogs to promote speaking performance. Educational Technology & Society 22, no. 1: 1–14. https://www.j-ets.net/collection/published-issues/22_1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yilmaz, Y. 2012. The relative effects of explicit correction and recasts on two target structures via two communication modes. Language Learning 62, no. 4: 1134–69. DOI: 10.1111/j.14679922.2012.00726.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• York, J., K. Shibata, H. Tokutake and H. Nakayama. 2020. Effect of SCMC on foreign language anxiety and learning experience: a comparison of voice, video, and VR-based oral interaction. ReCALL. DOI: 10.1017/S0958344020000154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, D.J., ed. 1999. Affect in Foreign Language and Second Language Learning: A Practical Guide to Creating a low-Anxiety Classroom Atmosphere. Boston: McGraw Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Yu, S. and I. Lee. 2014. An analysis of Chinese EFL students’ use of first and second language in peer feedback of L2 writing. System 47: 28–38. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2014.08.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, X. 2019. Foreign language anxiety and foreign language performance: a meta-analysis. The Modern Language Journal 103, no. 4: 763–81. DOI: 10.1111/modl.12590.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, L.J. and M. Rahimi. 2014. EFL learner’s anxiety level and their beliefs about corrective feedback in oral communication classes. System 42: 429–39. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2014.01.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, H. 2010. Investigating learners’ use and understanding of peer and teacher feedback on writing: a comparative study in a Chinese English writing classroom. Assessing Writing 15, no. 1: 3–17. DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2010.01.002.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou, M. 2016. The roles of social anxiety, autonomy, and learning orientation in second language learning: a structural equation modeling analysis. System 63: 89–100. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2016.09.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar