The effect of enhanced lexical retrieval on second language writing: A classroom experiment

Lexical retrieval is an essential subprocess in language production, and its efficiency is crucial for writing. To improve writing quality in a second language, we developed an experimental, computerized training for improving fluency of lexical retrieval in a classroom setting, applying techniques previously restricted to laboratory use. In a counterbalanced design with randomized assignment, each of two groups was trained on a different set of words for productive use. A previous study showed that students in both groups attained greater fluency of lexical retrieval on the trained word set in comparison to students who were not trained on that word set. The current study provides evidence that this enhanced fluency transferred to narrative writing, as students in both groups used the trained words more often in narrative texts. In addition, one of the groups showed significant improvement in their expression of essential content elements. However, no significant differences were found on global quality ratings. The results are discussed in the context of theories of limited processing capacity during text production. We also consider the implications of these results for language instruction.

[1]  Birgit Henriksen,et al.  THREE DIMENSIONS OF VOCABULARY DEVELOPMENT , 1999, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[2]  Norman Segalowitz,et al.  AUTOMATICITY AND LEXICAL SKILLS IN SECOND LANGUAGE FLUENCY: IMPLICATIONS FOR COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING , 1995 .

[3]  Sheldon Rosenberg,et al.  Effects of a high information-processing load on the writing process and the story written , 1995, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[4]  R. T. Kellogg.  Components of Working Memory in Text Production , 2005 .

[5]  Sarah Ellen Ransdell,et al.  Working memory constraints on writing quality and fluency. , 2013 .

[6]  R. T. Kellogg.  The Psychology of Writing , 1994 .

[7]  J. Kroll,et al.  Category Interference in Translation and Picture Naming: Evidence for Asymmetric Connections Between Bilingual Memory Representations , 1994 .

[8]  Denis Alamargot,et al.  Through the Models of Writing , 2001 .

[9]  Norman Segalowitz,et al.  Creative Automatization: Principles for Promoting Fluency Within a Communicative Framework , 1988 .

[10]  J. Stevens,et al.  Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences, 4th ed. , 2002 .

[11]  J. Hayes.  A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. , 1996 .

[12]  R. Weinert.  The Role of Formulaic Language in Second Language Acquisition: A Review , 1995 .

[13]  Nick C. Ellis,et al.  Psychology of Foreign Language Vocabulary Acquisition: Implications for CALL. , 1995 .

[14]  R. T. Kellogg.  A model of working memory in writing. , 1996 .

[15]  Amos Van Gelderen,et al.  Elementary Students' Skills in Revising Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis , 1997 .

[16]  P. Snellings,et al.  Lexical retrieval: an aspect of fluent second language production that can be enhanced , 2002 .

[17]  Bruce K. Britton,et al.  Writing and Revising Persuasive Documents: Cognitive Demands. , 1982 .

[18]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[19]  Ron Oostdam,et al.  Revision of Form and Meaning in Learning to Write Comprehensible Text , 2004 .

[20]  R. Zimmermann.  L2 writing: subprocesses, a model of formulating and empirical findings , 2000 .

[21]  Keiko Koda,et al.  L2 Word Recognition Research: A Critical Review. , 1996 .

[22]  Robert M. Dekeyser,et al.  Cognition and Second Language Instruction: Automaticity and automatization , 2001 .

[23]  W. Levelt,et al.  Speaking: From Intention to Articulation , 1990 .

[24]  Willem J. M. Levelt,et al.  A theory of lexical access in speech production , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[25]  R. Barnard.  Cognition and Second Language Instruction , 2003 .

[26]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[27]  Writing processes and cognitive demands , 1999 .

[28]  N. Segalowitz,et al.  Automatic and controlled processes in the first- and second-language reading of fluent bilinguals , 1983, Memory & cognition.

[29]  Linda Flower,et al.  The Dynamics of Composing : Making Plans and Juggling Constraints , 1980 .

[30]  B GrootdeA.M.,et al.  Forward and backward word translation by bilinguals , 1994 .

[31]  D. McCutchen.  A capacity theory of writing: Working memory in composition , 1996 .

[32]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: 1. Detection, Search, and Attention. , 1977 .

[33]  P. Snellings,et al.  First Language and Second Language Writing: The Role of Linguistic Knowledge, Speed of Processing, and Metacognitive Knowledge , 2003 .

[34]  R. Gonzalez.  Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences , 2003 .

[35]  J. B. Wyman,et al.  What is reading ability , 1921 .

[36]  P. Snellings,et al.  Linguistic knowledge, metacognitive knowledge and retrieval speed in L1, L2 and EFL writing. A structural equation modeling approach , 2002 .

[37]  Nancy L. Stein,et al.  What's in a Story: An Approach to Comprehension and Instruction. Technical Report No. 200. , 1981 .

[38]  Mark Torrance,et al.  The Cognitive Demands of Writing , 1999 .

[39]  M. Just,et al.  From the SelectedWorks of Marcel Adam Just 1992 A capacity theory of comprehension : Individual differences in working memory , 2017 .

[40]  T. Carr,et al.  Adapting to processing demands in discourse production: The case of handwriting. , 1988 .

[41]  Deborah McCutchen,et al.  Individual Differences in Writing: Implications of Translating Fluency. , 1994 .

[42]  M. Potter,et al.  Lexical and conceptual representation in beginning and proficient bilinguals , 1984 .