Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 539

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Explicit and Implicit Negative Feedback: An Empirical Study of the Learning of Linguistic Generalizations

Carroll, Susanne, Swain, Merrill·1993·Studies in Second Language Acquisition
DOI 10.1017/s0272263100012158
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The relative effects of various types of negative feedback on the acquisition of the English dative alternation by 100 adult Spanish-speaking learners of English as a second language were investigated. Our objective was to determine empirically whether feedback can help learners learn the appropriate abstract constraints on an overgeneral rule. All subjects were trained on the alternation, which was presented in terms of a simple structural change. Subjects were divided into groups according to the type of feedback they received when they made an error. Specifically, upon making an error, Group A subjects were given explicit metalinguistic information about the generalization we hoped they would learn. Group B subjects were told that their response was wrong. Group C subjects were corrected when they erred, giving them a model of the response desired along with implicit negative evidence that their response was incorrect. Group D subjects, having made an error, were asked if they were sure about their response. The comparison group received no feedback.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0272263100012158

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 71

  1. White, 1991, Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom, Second Language Research, 7, 133
  2. 10.1017/S0272263100008408 · DOI
  3. 10.1017/S0142716400007827 · DOI
  4. Tomlin, Repetition in discourse, 1
  5. Swain, 1987, The development of bilingual proficiency final report: Classroom treatment, 2, 190
  6. 10.1111/j.1944-9720.1984.tb01727.x · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1007/BF02176647 · doi:10.1007/bf02176647
  8. Schwartz, 1992, Learnability and grammar reorganization in L2 A: Against negative evidence causing the unlearning of verb movement, Second Language Research, 8, 1
  9. Schwartz, 1986, The epistemological status of second language acquisition, Second Language Research, 2, 120
  10. 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1986.tb00379.x · DOI
  11. 10.1075/tsl.5.14sch · DOI
  12. Rumelhart, 1987, Mechanisms of language acquisition
  13. Rumelhart, 1986, Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the micro-structure of cognition: Vol. 2. Psychological and biological models, 10.7551/mitpress/5236.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.2307/3586206 · DOI
  15. Pinker, 1988, Connections and symbols, 73, 10.7551/mitpress/2103.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Gregg K. (1991, October). Taking explanation seriously; or, let a couple of flowers bloom. Paper presented at the Conference on Theory Construction and Methodology in Second Language Research, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
  17. Allwright, 1975, New directions in second language learning, teaching and bilingual education, 96
  18. 10.1016/0010-0277(79)90001-5 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1982.tb06973.x · DOI · Paper page
  20. O' Grady, 1984, Principles of grammar and learning
  21. Herron, 1988, Learning grammatical structures in a foreign language: Modelling versus feedback, The French Review, 61, 910
  22. Porquier, 1977, L'analyse des erreurs: Problèmes et perspectives, Études de linguistique appliquée, 25, 23
  23. Fodor, 1979, The language of thought
  24. Mazurkewich, 1984, Universals of second language acquisition
  25. 10.1016/0010-0277(84)90030-1 · DOI
  26. Oehrle R. (1976). The grammatical status of the English dative alternation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
  27. Chomsky, 1981, Explanation in linguistics: The logical problem of language acquisition, 32
  28. 10.2307/3586390 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Dulay, 1982, Language two
  30. 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1984.tb01002.x · DOI
  31. Anderson, 1976, Language, memory and thought
  32. Bever, 1970, Cognition and the development of language, 274
  33. Grimshaw J. (1985, October). Remarks on dative verbs and universal grammar. Paper presented at the Tenth Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development.
  34. Pinker, 1989, Learnability and cognition
  35. Steinbach, 1988, Student response to feedback on written composition: The role of intentional learning
  36. Glass, 1979, Cognition
  37. Gombert, 1989, Le developpement metalinguistique
  38. 10.1075/lald.1 · DOI · Paper page
  39. Anderson, 1983, The architecture of cognition
  40. Bates, 1988, From first words to grammar: Individual differences and dissociable mechanisms
  41. Berwick, 1984, The grammatical basis of linguistic performance: Language use and acquisition
  42. 10.1037/0012-1649.24.5.684 · doi:10.1037/0012-1649.24.5.684 · Paper page
  43. Cook, 1988, Chomsky's Universal Grammar: An introduction
  44. Brown, 1970, Cognition and the development of language, 11
  45. 10.1017/S0142716400005555 · DOI
  46. 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1977.tb00290.x · DOI · Paper page
  47. Chomsky, 1986, Knowledge of language
  48. Holley, 1971, Imitation and correction in foreign language learning, Modern Language Journal, 55, 494
  49. Courchene, 1980, The error analysis hypothesis, the contrastive analysis hypothesis, and the correction of error in the second language classroom, TESL Talk, 11, 3
  50. Chomsky, 1988, Language and problems of knowledge: The Managua lectures
  51. 10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268 · DOI · Paper page
  52. 10.2307/3587274 · DOI
  53. Schwartz B. (1987). The modular basis of second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
  54. Jackendoff, 1983, Semantics and cognition
  55. Fodor, 1988, Connections and symbols, 3
  56. Gaskill, 1980, Discourse analysis in second language research, 125
  57. 10.1016/S0019-9958(67)91165-5 · DOI · Paper page
  58. Green, 1974, Semantics and syntactic regularity
  59. Hawkins, 1987, Markedness and the acquisition of the English dative alternation by L2 speakers, Second Language Research, 3, 20
  60. 10.1017/S0305000900005596 · DOI · Paper page
  61. Hornstein, 1981, Explanation in linguistics: The logical problem of language acquisition, 9
  62. Krashen, 1981, Second language acquisition and learning
  63. 10.1016/0010-0277(84)90040-4 · DOI
  64. Krashen, 1985, The input hypothesis: Issues and implications
  65. 10.1017/S0272263100009517 · DOI · Paper page
  66. Jackendoff, 1990, Semantic structures
  67. Long, 1988, Issues in second language acquisition: Multiple perspectives, 115
  68. Long M. (1991, October). Assessment strategies for second language acquisition theories. Paper presented at the Conference on Theory Construction and Methodology in Second Language Research, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
  69. 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1984.tb00997.x · DOI
  70. 10.1007/978-3-642-74124-1 · DOI
  71. McNeill, 1966, The genesis of language

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Carroll, S., & Swain, M.
Venue
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
1993-09
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
357-386
ISSN
  • 0272-2631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-1545
DOI
10.1017/s0272263100012158
OpenAlex
W2100069851
Cited by
539
References
2
FWCI
37.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 5546 d)

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.