the effects of increasing cognitive complexity on l2 narrative oral production
DESCRIPTION
The effects of increasing cognitive complexity on L2 narrative oral production. Roger Gilabert [email protected] Blanquerna Communication Studies Department Universitat Ramon Llull Barcelona, Spain Leuven 2005. Context. 2 main research agendas into task features: - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
The effects of increasing The effects of increasing cognitive complexity oncognitive complexity on
L2 narrative oral L2 narrative oral productionproduction
Roger GilabertRoger [email protected]@blanquerna.url.edu
Blanquerna Communication Studies Blanquerna Communication Studies DepartmentDepartment
Universitat Ramon LlullUniversitat Ramon LlullBarcelona, SpainBarcelona, Spain
Leuven 2005Leuven 2005
ContextContext2 main research agendas into task 2 main research agendas into task
features:features:
- Interactionist perspectiveInteractionist perspective: how certain : how certain conversational episodes (e.g. CR or CC), caused by conversational episodes (e.g. CR or CC), caused by task design, may lead to acquisition (Long, 1985, task design, may lead to acquisition (Long, 1985, 1989, 2000).1989, 2000).
- Information-processing approach: how Information-processing approach: how manipulating the cognitive features of tasks can manipulating the cognitive features of tasks can lead to differentials in the fluency, complexity, and lead to differentials in the fluency, complexity, and accuracy of learners’ performance .accuracy of learners’ performance .
Context: research into cognitive task Context: research into cognitive task featuresfeatures
degree of familiarity: (Bygate, 1999, 2001; Foster & Skehan, degree of familiarity: (Bygate, 1999, 2001; Foster & Skehan, 1996; Plough & Gass, 1993; Robinson, 2001)1996; Plough & Gass, 1993; Robinson, 2001)
number of elements: (Kuiken & Vedder, 2004; Robinson, 2001)number of elements: (Kuiken & Vedder, 2004; Robinson, 2001)
single and dual task performance: (Niwa, 2000)single and dual task performance: (Niwa, 2000)
pre-task and on-line planning time: (Crookes, 1989; Ellis, 1987; pre-task and on-line planning time: (Crookes, 1989; Ellis, 1987; Foster & Skehan, 1996; Foster & Skehan, 1996; Mehnert, 1998; Ortega, 1999; Mehnert, 1998; Ortega, 1999; Skehan & Foster, 1997; Skehan & Foster, 1997; Wigglesworth, 1997; Yuan & Wigglesworth, 1997; Yuan & Ellis, 2003)Ellis, 2003)
degree of complexity along displaced, degree of complexity along displaced, past time reference: (Iwashita past time reference: (Iwashita et al.et al. 2001; Robinson, 1995; 2001; Robinson, 1995; Rahimpour, 1997). Rahimpour, 1997).
Concerned with: how Task Complexity affects performance; how balanced performance may lead to better use and acquisition; and how tasks can be best sequenced according to their cognitive complexity
Context: Skehan / RobinsonContext: Skehan / RobinsonMost studies concerned with the issue of competition for Most studies concerned with the issue of competition for
attention during task performance. attention during task performance.
Predictions for performance: Predictions for performance: competition exists (Skehan, 1998; Skehan & Foster, 2001competition exists (Skehan, 1998; Skehan & Foster, 2001 )) it depends: resource-directing vs. resource-dispersingit depends: resource-directing vs. resource-dispersing (Robinson, 2001; 2003; 2005)(Robinson, 2001; 2003; 2005) + cognitively complex = - fluency+ cognitively complex = - fluency + complexity+ complexity + accuracy+ accuracy
Claims based on studies which have manipulated task features Claims based on studies which have manipulated task features in isolation (e.g. planning time studies and +/- here-and-in isolation (e.g. planning time studies and +/- here-and-now studies).now studies).
GOAL: of this study is to provide further evidence regarding the GOAL: of this study is to provide further evidence regarding the two widely researched variables of planning time and +/- Here-and-two widely researched variables of planning time and +/- Here-and-Now, and to explore the synergistic effects of manipulating them Now, and to explore the synergistic effects of manipulating them simultaneously. simultaneously.
Previous findingsPrevious findingsPlanning time studies:Planning time studies:
Fluency increasesFluency increases (Foster & Skehan, 1996; Skehan & Foster, 1997; Ortega, (Foster & Skehan, 1996; Skehan & Foster, 1997; Ortega, 1999; Yuan & Ellis, 2003)1999; Yuan & Ellis, 2003)Higher structural complexity (Foster & Skehan, 1996; Ortega, 1999; Yuan & Higher structural complexity (Foster & Skehan, 1996; Ortega, 1999; Yuan &
Ellis, 2003; only a trend in Skehan & Foster, Ellis, 2003; only a trend in Skehan & Foster,
1997)1997)No significant effects on lexical complexity: (Ortega, 1999; Yuan & Ellis, No significant effects on lexical complexity: (Ortega, 1999; Yuan & Ellis,
2003).2003).Mixed results for accuracy: higher accuracy (Foster & Skehan, 1997)Mixed results for accuracy: higher accuracy (Foster & Skehan, 1997) no differences (Foster & Skehan, 1996; Yan & no differences (Foster & Skehan, 1996; Yan &
Ellis,Ellis, 2003)2003) mixed restuls (Ortega, 1999)mixed restuls (Ortega, 1999)
Previous findingsPrevious findingsHere-and-Now/There-and-Then studies:Here-and-Now/There-and-Then studies:
Fluency decreases: (Robinson, 1995; Rahimpour, 1997)Fluency decreases: (Robinson, 1995; Rahimpour, 1997)
Increased lexical complexity: (Robinson, 1995; Rahimpour, 1997)Increased lexical complexity: (Robinson, 1995; Rahimpour, 1997)
No differences in structural complexity: (Robinson, 1995; No differences in structural complexity: (Robinson, 1995; Rahimpour, Rahimpour,
1997)1997)
Higher accuracy: (Robinson, 1995; Rahimpour, 1997; Iwashita Higher accuracy: (Robinson, 1995; Rahimpour, 1997; Iwashita et et alal.).)
Research questionResearch question
How does manipulating Task How does manipulating Task Complexity simultaneously Complexity simultaneously along planning time and the along planning time and the +/- here-and-now variables +/- here-and-now variables affect production?affect production?
I.I. Pre-task planning time will positively affect the areas of fluency Pre-task planning time will positively affect the areas of fluency and structural complexity, with no effects on lexical complexity and structural complexity, with no effects on lexical complexity or accuracy.or accuracy.
- cognitive complexity + cognitive - cognitive complexity + cognitive complexitycomplexity
+ fluency - fluency + fluency - fluency + structural complexity - structural + structural complexity - structural
complexity complexity = lexical complexity = lexical complexity= lexical complexity = lexical complexity = = accuracy = accuracyaccuracy = accuracy
II.II. More complex tasks, in the there-and-then, will trigger more More complex tasks, in the there-and-then, will trigger more accurate and complex speech at the expense of fluencyaccurate and complex speech at the expense of fluency..
- cognitive complexity + cognitive complexity- cognitive complexity + cognitive complexity + fluency+ fluency - less fluency - less fluency - structural complexity + structural - structural complexity + structural
complexitycomplexity - lexical complexity + lexical complexity- lexical complexity + lexical complexity - accuracy + accuracy- accuracy + accuracy
HypothesesHypotheses
Experimental designExperimental design
Story 1 Story 2 Story 3 Story 4
Group A + planning timeThere-and-Then
- planning timeThere-and-Then
+ planning time Here-and-Now
- planning time
Here-and-Now
Group B - planning timeThere-and-Then
+ planning time Here-and-Now
- planning time
Here-and-Now
+ planning time
There-and-Then
Group C
+ planning time Here-and-Now
- planning timeHere-and-Now
+ planning time
There-and-Then
- planning time
There-and-Then
Group D
- planning timeHere-and-Now
+ planning timeThere-and-Then
- planning time
There-and-Then
+ planning time Here-and-Now
Condition 1: Planned Here-and-NowCondition 2: Unplanned Here-and-NowCondition 3: Planned There-and-ThenCondition 4: Unplanned There-and-Then
Simple Complex
Begin the story like this: YESTERDAY Mr. Brown was shopping at the supermarket. He was checking his shopping list and looking at prices. An employee was putting price tags on the products.
Experimental design: example of comic strip
ParticipantsParticipants48 volunteers among lower-intermediate, first- and second- year university students.
Ages 18-22.
Similar number of years of instruction.
No significant differences in proficiency (C-Test)
MeasuresMeasuresFluency:Fluency: Rate A (syllables x minute in unpruned speech)Rate A (syllables x minute in unpruned speech)
Rate B (syllables x minute in pruned speech) Rate B (syllables x minute in pruned speech) Structural Structural Complexity:Complexity: S-Nodes per T-unitS-Nodes per T-unit
Lexical Complexity:Lexical Complexity: Percentage of Lexical WordsPercentage of Lexical WordsRatio of Lexical / Function WordsRatio of Lexical / Function WordsGuiraud’s Index of Lexical RichnessGuiraud’s Index of Lexical Richness
Accuracy:Accuracy: Error-free T-unitsError-free T-unitsTLU of ArticlesTLU of ArticlesPercentage of Self-repairsPercentage of Self-repairsRepaired to Unrepaired ErrorsRepaired to Unrepaired Errors
Why self-repairs?Why self-repairs?
Self-repairs are the result of wrong formulation (Levelt, 1989), and may Self-repairs are the result of wrong formulation (Levelt, 1989), and may be used to correct an inappropriate syntactic structure, a lexical be used to correct an inappropriate syntactic structure, a lexical problem, faulty morphology, or a phonetic error. Self-repairs, problem, faulty morphology, or a phonetic error. Self-repairs, whether other-initiated or self-initiated Schegloff’s (1977), denote whether other-initiated or self-initiated Schegloff’s (1977), denote students’ students’ awareness of formawareness of form and can be interpreted as learners’ and can be interpreted as learners’ attempts at being accurateattempts at being accurate. Self-repairs require conscious attention. . Self-repairs require conscious attention. Some of the Some of the functionsfunctions of self-repairs are: of self-repairs are:
Learners Learners automatizeautomatize the retrieval of target language knowledge they the retrieval of target language knowledge they already have.already have.
They They revise their hypothesesrevise their hypotheses about the target language (Lyster and about the target language (Lyster and Ranta, 1997:57).Ranta, 1997:57).
They They noticing a holenoticing a hole in their own interlanguage that may direct their in their own interlanguage that may direct their attention to relevant input (Swain, 1998:66; Dörnyei & Kormos, attention to relevant input (Swain, 1998:66; Dörnyei & Kormos, 1999).1999).
They They check their speechcheck their speech, both internal and overt, , both internal and overt, againstagainst their their receptive knowledgereceptive knowledge (De Bot, 1996:551). (De Bot, 1996:551).
Statistical analysisStatistical analysisSphericity of data achieved by means of detecting (by means of Sphericity of data achieved by means of detecting (by means of
box plots) and eliminating outliers from the calculation. box plots) and eliminating outliers from the calculation.
Repeated-measures ANOVAS for stories and conditions.Repeated-measures ANOVAS for stories and conditions.
Post hoc Post hoc Scheffe’s comparisons to identify exact location of Scheffe’s comparisons to identify exact location of differences.differences.
Transcription and codingTranscription and codingIntrarater and interrater measures used for transcription and coding
Intrarater agreement 97%
Interrater agreement on 10% of the data reached 93.7%
Hypothesis 1Hypothesis 1+/- Planning time+/- Planning time
119.4 115.4 115.7 111.8
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Condition 1Planned Here-and-
Now
Condition 2UnplannedHere-and-
Now
Condition 3Planned
There-and-Then
Condition 4UnplannedThere-and-
Then
97.08 96.3389.75
107.81
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Condition 1Planned
Here-and-Now
Condition 2Unplanned
Here-and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 4UnplannedThere-and-
Then
Speech Rate A
Speech Rate B
119.4 115.7 115.4 111.8
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Condition1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 2Unplanned
Here-and-Now
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
Hypothesis 2Hypothesis 2Here-and-Now/There-and-Here-and-Now/There-and-
thenthen
96.33 97.0889.75
107.81
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 2Unplanned
Here-and-Now
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
FluencyFluencyResultsResults
As predicted, fluency is negatively affected by increases in cognitive complexity along both variables
Hypothesis 1Hypothesis 1Planning timePlanning time
Hypothesis 2Hypothesis 2Here-and-Now/There-and-Here-and-Now/There-and-
thenthen
Lexical Lexical ComplexityComplexity
ResultsResults
Against prediction, providing planning time had a significant
impact on lexical complexity
36.6433.28
35.43 33.92
0
10
20
30
40
50
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 2Unplanned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
58.2950.33
55.53 51.81
0
1020
30
40
5060
70
80
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 2Unplanned
Here-and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
5.244.79 5.08
4.59
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 2Unplanned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
36.64 35.4333.28 33.92
0
10
20
30
40
50
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 2Unplanned
Here-and-Now
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
58.29 55.5350.33 51.81
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 2Unplanned
Here-and-Now
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
5.24 5.084.79 4.59
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 2Unplanned
Here-and-Now
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
Against prediction, increasing complexity along +/- Here-and-Now had NO
significant impact on lexical complexity
Percentage of Lexical words
Ratio of Lexical to Function
words
Guiraud’s Index
Hypothesis 1Hypothesis 1+/- Planning time+/- Planning time
Hypothesis 2Hypothesis 2Here-and-Now/There-and-Here-and-Now/There-and-
thenthen
StructuralStructuralComplexityComplexity
ResultsResults
Against prediction, structural complexity was not significantly affected by planning time or by increasing along +/- Here-and-
Now
1.55 1.5 1.46 1.45
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 2Unplanned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
1.451.51.551.41
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 2Unplanned
Here-and-Now
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
S-Nodes per
T-Units
Hypothesis 1: Hypothesis 1: Planning timePlanning time
Hypothesis 2: Here-and-Now/There-Hypothesis 2: Here-and-Now/There-and-thenand-thenAccuracyAccuracy
ResultsResults
As predicted, planning time had no impact on accuracy
Partially in line with prediction, increasing complexity along +/- Here-and-
Now triggered more attention to form
Error-free T-Units
TLU of articles
Percentage of self-repairs
23.65 24.32 23.3621.53
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 2Unplanned
Here-and-Now
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
86.09 83.43 84.41 82.27
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 2Unplanned
Here-and-Now
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
19.84
13.9
18.84
14.21
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 2Unplanned Here-
and-Now
Condition 4Unplanned There-
and-Then
17.19
25.46
17.63
22.23
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 2Unplanned
Here-and-Now
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
17.19 17.63
25.4622.23
05
101520253035
Condition 1Planned Here-and-
Now
Condition 2Unplanned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 4Unplanned There-
and-Then
13.9
19.84 18.84
14.21
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Condition 1Planned Here-and-
Now
Condition 2Unplanned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 4Unplanned There-
and-Then
86.09 84.41 83.43 82.27
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 2Unplanned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
23.65 23.36 24.3221.53
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 2Unplanned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
Ratio of repaired to unrepaired
errors
Discussion: Planning time Discussion: Planning time and fluencyand fluency
Conceptualization during pre-task Conceptualization during pre-task planning allows faster retrieval during planning allows faster retrieval during performanceperformance
Instantiation of words (i.e. lemmas and Instantiation of words (i.e. lemmas and forms) or chunks in WMforms) or chunks in WM
Problem-solving mechanisms, Problem-solving mechanisms, rehearsal, and memorization (Ortega, rehearsal, and memorization (Ortega, 1999)1999)
Discussion: Discussion: +/- Here-and-Now +/- Here-and-Now
and fluencyand fluency
Lack of contextual supportLack of contextual support Efficient scheduling and attention-Efficient scheduling and attention-
allocation policiesallocation policies
Discussion: Discussion: planning time and lexical and planning time and lexical and
structural complexitystructural complexity
More elaborate conceptualizationMore elaborate conceptualization Consideration of more alternativesConsideration of more alternatives Access to less activated termsAccess to less activated terms
Discussion: Discussion: +/- Here-and-Now and lexical +/- Here-and-Now and lexical
and structural complexityand structural complexity
Interpropositional coherenceInterpropositional coherence Dependence on lexical meaningDependence on lexical meaning
Discussion: Discussion: Planning time and accuracyPlanning time and accuracy
It facilitates all dimensions of It facilitates all dimensions of productionproduction
Does not necessarily draw attention Does not necessarily draw attention to form during performanceto form during performance
Discussion: Discussion: +/- Here-and-Now and +/- Here-and-Now and
accuracyaccuracy
It draws attention to formIt draws attention to form Changes in macro and micro planningChanges in macro and micro planning Stretch interlanguage (Klein & Stretch interlanguage (Klein &
Perdue, 1992)Perdue, 1992) Comparison of how L1 and L2 Comparison of how L1 and L2
grammatize notions (Talmy, 2000)grammatize notions (Talmy, 2000)
Discussion: Discussion: Simultaneous manipulation Simultaneous manipulation
of both variablesof both variables
1)1) Attention may be allocated to Attention may be allocated to complexity and accuracy complexity and accuracy simultaneouslysimultaneously
2)2) Keeping tasks simple along resource-Keeping tasks simple along resource-dispersing dimensions and complex dispersing dimensions and complex along resource-directing one may be along resource-directing one may be beneficial for language developmentbeneficial for language development
Simultaneous Simultaneous manipulationmanipulation
5.244.79 5.08
4.59
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Condition 1Planned Here-
and-Now
Condition 2Unplanned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 4Unplanned
There-and-Then
Guiraud’s Index
Percentage of self-reapairs
13.9
19.84 18.84
14.21
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Condition 1Planned Here-and-
Now
Condition 2Unplanned Here-
and-Now
Condition 3Planned There-
and-Then
Condition 4Unplanned There-
and-Then
ConclusionsConclusions
Task Complexity is a robust and testable construct.Task Complexity is a robust and testable construct.
Competition for attention may only happen when Task Complexity is Competition for attention may only happen when Task Complexity is increased along resource-dispersing variables.increased along resource-dispersing variables.
Attention to both complexity and accuracy may be possible if tasks Attention to both complexity and accuracy may be possible if tasks are kept simple along resource-dispersing variable and complex are kept simple along resource-dispersing variable and complex along resource-directing variables. along resource-directing variables.
More research is needed regarding the synergistic effects of More research is needed regarding the synergistic effects of combining resource-directing and resource-dispersing variables.combining resource-directing and resource-dispersing variables.
Do the results in this study apply to other task types and other Do the results in this study apply to other task types and other dimensions?dimensions?
Thank youThank you