Cognitive Theoretical Perspectives of Corrective Feedback

doi:10.1017/9781108589789.004

3 - Cognitive Theoretical Perspectives of Corrective Feedback

from Part I - Theoretical Perspectives on Corrective Feedback

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 February 2021

Ronald P. Leow and

Meagan Driver

Edited by

Hossein Nassaji and

Eva Kartchava

Show author details

Hossein Nassaji: Affiliation:
University of Victoria, British Columbia
Eva Kartchava: Affiliation:
Carleton University, Ottawa

Book contents

Get access

Summary

The role of corrective feedback (CF) in the L2 learning process has for decades remained a dominant issue in the (I)SLA strands of research, albeit some overlapping between these two contexts. Indeed, there are several cognitive theoretical underpinnings cited by empirical CF studies to account for the role or lack thereof of CF in the L2 learning process, for example, the Monitor Model (Krashen, 1982), the Interaction Hypothesis (Long, 1996), the Noticing Hypothesis (Schmidt, 1990), the Output Hypothesis (Swain, 2005), Skill Acquisition Theory (DeKeyser, 2015), and the Model of the L2 learning process in ISLA (Leow, 2015), be it oral, written, or computerized or digital. This chapter (1) traces the early roots of CF, (2) presents a coarse-grained theoretical feedback processing framework to discuss the cognitive theoretical underpinnings postulated to account for the role of CF in L2 development, (3) provides a list of cognitive processes assumed to play a role during CF appropriation, and (4) reports on each theoretical underpinning followed by a commentary on their ability to account for the role of CF in L2 development.

Keywords

corrective feedback cognitive processes CF theoretical underpinnings implicit or explicit learning depth of processing level of awareness

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Corrective Feedback in Second Language Learning and Teaching , pp. 65 - 84

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108589789.004 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2021

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychological Review, 89(4), 369–406.Google Scholar

Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Anderson, J. R. (2007). How can a human mind occur in the physical universe? New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bitchener, J. (2016). To what extent has the published written CF research aided our understanding of its potential for L2 development? ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 167(2), 111–131.Google Scholar

Bitchener, J. & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.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(4), 436–458.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton and Company.CrossRef Google Scholar

Corder, S. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5(4), 161–170.CrossRef Google Scholar

Craik, F. I. M. & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671–684.Google Scholar

DeKeyser, R. M. (2015). Skill acquisition theory. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 94–112). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Egi, T. (2007). Interpreting recasts as linguistic evidence. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(4), 511–537.Google Scholar

Ellis, R. (1991). The interaction hypothesis: A critical evaluation. Paper presented at the Regional Language Center Seminar, Singapore, April 22–28, 1991. (ERIC document no. ED338037).Google Scholar

Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Gass, S. M. & Mackey, A. (2015). Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 175–200). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Gurzynski-Weiss, L., Al Khalil, M., Baralt, M. & Leow, R. P (2016). Levels of awareness in relation to type of recast and type of linguistic item in computer-mediated communication: A concurrent investigation. In Leow, R. P., Cerezo, L. & Baralt, M. (eds.), A psycholinguistic approach to technology and language learning (pp. 151–170). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar

Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures: Applied linguistics for language teachers. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar

Leeman, J. (2007). Feedback in L2 learning: Responding to errors during practice. In DeKeyser, R. (ed.), Practicing in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 111–137). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leow, R. P. (2001). Attention, awareness and foreign language behavior. Language Learning, 51(Suppl. 1), 113–155.Google Scholar

Leow, R. P. (2015). Explicit learning in the L2 classroom: A student-centered approach. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Leow, R. P. (2019). ISLA: How implicit or how explicit should it be? Theoretical, empirical, and pedagogical/curricular issues. Language Teaching Research, 23(4), 476–493.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leow, R. P. (2020). L2 writing-to-learn: Theory, research, and a curricular approach. In Manchón, Rosa M. (ed.), Writing and language learning: Advancing research agendas (pp. 95–117). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leow, R. P. & Cerezo, L. (2016). Deconstructing the “I” and “SLA” in ISLA: One curricular approach. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 43–63.Google Scholar

Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309–365.Google Scholar

Loewen, S. (2005). Incidental focus on form and second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27(3), 361–386.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction, and second language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379, 259–278.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 126–141.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (1989). Task, group, and task-group interactions. University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 8 2), 1–26.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. C. & Bhatia, T. K. (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–467). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Lyster, R. (1998). Recasts, repetition and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(1), 51–81.Google Scholar

Lyster, R. & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265–302.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(3), 405–430.Google Scholar

Manchón, R. M. & Vasylets, O. (2019). Language learning through writing: Theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence. In Schwieter, J. W. & Benati, A. (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of language learning (pp. 341–362). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Nagata, N. (1993). Intelligent computer feedback for second language instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 77(3), 330–339.Google Scholar

Russell, J. & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar. In Norris, J. M. (ed.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 133–162). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158.Google Scholar

Schmidt, R. W. (1993). Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 206–226.Google Scholar

Schmidt, R. W. (1994). Implicit learning and the cognitive unconscious: Of artificial grammars and SLA. In Ellis, N. (ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 165–209). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Schmidt, R. W. (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 and teaching, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center Technical Report No. 9 (pp. 1–64). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.Google Scholar

Schmidt, R. W. (2001). Attention. In Robinson, P. (ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Schmidt, R. & Frota, S. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in second language. In Day, R. (ed.), Talking to learn (pp. 237–326). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar

Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10(3), 219–231.Google Scholar

Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. & Madden, C. (eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar

Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In Hinkel, E. (ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp.471–483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Tomlin, R. S. & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(2), 183–203.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.