Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form
Abstract
Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to examine focus on form in cognitive processing terms by postulating plausible, psychologically real, cognitive correlates for a range of L2 learning processes that have become prevalent in the instructed second language acquisition (SLA) literature. Progress in adult SLA is thought often to depend crucially upon cognitive processes such as paying attention to features of target input, noticing interlocutor reactions to interlanguage (IL) output, and making insightful comparisons involving differences between input and output utterance details. To be effective, these cognitive comparisons must be carried out under certain conditions of processing meaning, forms, and function, i.e., conditions which promote processing for language learning . Whereas pedagogically oriented discussions of issues – such as noticing the gap and L2 processing – abound, psycholinguistically motivated rationales for pedagogical recommendations are still rare. Focus on form is proposed as an instructional expedient for addressing pervasive, systematic, remediable or persistent L2 learning problems (Long, 1991); for instance, pervasiveness and systematicity as evidenced in emerged L2 developmental errors, persistence as evidenced in the less-than-targetlike production of advanced immersion learners (Doughty & Williams, 1998b; Long, 1991; Long & Robinson, 1998), and remediability in the sense of not fundamentally determined by immutable acquisition processes…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Doughty (2001) provided a review of the psycholinguistic underpinnings of focus on form.
“Doughty (2001) provided a review of the psycholinguistic underpinnings of focus on form.”
From In Defense of Tasks and TBLT: Nonissues and Real Issues (2016) · cites this paper as Doughty, 2001
Nowhere did Doughty suggest that learning from other sources or by alternative means cannot occur, or occur over a longer period than 40 seconds.
“Nowhere did Doughty suggest that learning from other sources or by alternative means cannot occur, or occur over a longer period than 40 seconds.”
From In Defense of Tasks and TBLT: Nonissues and Real Issues (2016) · cites this paper as Doughty, 2001
Doughty discussed a window of perhaps 40 seconds following production during which selective attention might utilize online implicit negative feedback for form-function mapping.
“Doughty was discussing theory and research findings on working memory and short-term memory pertaining to the estimated period of perhaps 40 seconds following production during which speakers' (and by inference, L2 learners') selective attention span might be expected to be capable of utilizing online implicit negative feedback in the form of recasts for form-function mapping.”
From In Defense of Tasks and TBLT: Nonissues and Real Issues (2016) · cites this paper as Doughty, 2001
Doughty claimed no such thing as that acquisition only takes place online during communication; nor is such a belief part of the psycholinguistic rationale for TBLT.
“But Doughty claimed no such thing; nor is such a belief part of the psycholinguistic rationale for TBLT.”
From In Defense of Tasks and TBLT: Nonissues and Real Issues (2016) · cites this paper as Doughty, 2001
Focus on form can be viewed from a psycholinguistic perspective by considering the cognitive correlates of the components of focus on form as they relate to both language use and learning.
“Focus on form can also be viewed from a psycholinguistic perspective by considering 'the cognitive correlates of the components of focus on form' (Doughty, 2001: 211) as these relate to both language use and learning.”
From Focus on form: A critical review (2016) · cites this paper as Doughty, 2001
Cites
Focus on Form in Task-based Language Teaching
Long, M. (2000) · Language Policy and Pedagogy · doi:10.1075/z.96.11lon · Cited by 440 · see citing works
Effects of length and syntactic complexity on initiation times for prepared utterances
Ferreira, F. (1991) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/0749-596x(91)90004-4 · Cited by 288 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
AT THE INTERFACE: DYNAMIC INTERACTIONS OF EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT LANGUAGE KNOWLEDGE
Ellis, N. C. (2005) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s027226310505014x · Cited by 893 · see citing works
ORAL FEEDBACK IN CLASSROOM SLA: A Meta-Analysis
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263109990520 · Cited by 838 · see citing works
Corrective Feedback and Teacher Development
Ellis, R. (2009) · L2 Journal · doi:10.5070/l2.v1i1.9054 · Cited by 659 · see citing works
“Doughty (2001), for example, argued that for CF to induce change in a learner’s interlanguage, it needs to take place in a “window of opportunity” and attract roving attention to form while the learner’s focal attention remains on meaning.”
MethodInstructed SLA: Constraints, Compensation, and Enhancement
Doughty, C. J. (2003) · The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1002/9780470756492.ch10 · Cited by 519 · see citing works
Self-citationLegislation by Hypothesis: The Case of Task-Based Instruction
Swan, M. (2005) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/ami013 · Cited by 481 · see citing works
Focus on form: A critical review
Ellis, R. (2016) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/1362168816628627 · Cited by 417 · see citing works
INCIDENTAL FOCUS ON FORM AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING
Loewen, S. (2005) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263105050163 · Cited by 381 · see citing works
In Defense of Tasks and TBLT: Nonissues and Real Issues
Long, M. H. (2016) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190515000057 · Cited by 359 · see citing works
Recasts, language anxiety, modified output, and L2 learning
Sheen, Y. (2008) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00480.x · Cited by 330 · see citing works
Shintani, N., & Ellis, R. (2013) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.011 · Cited by 278 · see citing works
Wang, Z. (2014) · Task-Based Language Teaching · doi:10.1075/tblt.5.02wan · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Variation in the frequency and characteristics of incidental focus on form
Loewen, S. (2003) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1191/1362168803lr129oa · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Saito, K. (2013) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12015 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Parlak, Ö., & Ziegler, N. (2017) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263116000310 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
The Occurrence and Effectiveness of Spontaneous Focus on Form in Adult ESL Classrooms
Nassaji, H. (2010) · The Canadian Modern Language Review · doi:10.3138/cmlr.66.6.907 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
T(w)o and fro: using the L1 as a language teaching tool in the CLIL classroom
Gallagher, F., & Colohan, G. (2017) · The Language Learning Journal · doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.947382 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
“This approach involves providing students with overt opportunities ‘to notice’ formal aspects of language in meaningful, communicative contexts where the main attention of the students has been primarily on meaning (Doughty 2001, 2003; Schmidt 2001; Ellis, Basturkmen and Loewen 2002; Robinson 2003).”
Background
- Authors
- Doughty, C.
- Corresponding author
- Doughty, Catherine
- ORCID
- Doughty, Catherine
- Venue
- Cognition and Second Language Instruction
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2001-11-29
- Pages
- 206-257
- OpenAlex
- W2406173072
- Cited by
- 523
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 36 · 2012: 37
- FWCI
- 52.85
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- form-focused instruction, second language acquisition, cognitive processes, noticing, interlanguage, pedagogical intervention, adult second language learning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
