CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 381EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and LearningLinguistics and Language Analysis

INCIDENTAL FOCUS ON FORM AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

Loewen, Shawn·2005·Studies in Second Language Acquisition
DOI 10.1017/s0272263105050163
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Incidental focus on form overtly draws learners' attention to linguistic items as they arise spontaneously—without prior planning—in meaning-focused interaction. This study examined the effectiveness of incidental focus on form in promoting second language (L2) learning. Seventeen hours of naturally occurring, meaning-focused L2 lessons were observed in 12 different classes of young adults in a private language school in Auckland, New Zealand. A total of 491 focus-on-form episodes (FFEs) were identified and used as a basis for individualized test items in which participants who participated in specific FFEs were asked to recall the linguistic information provided in them. The results revealed that learners were able to recall the targeted linguistic information correctly or partially correctly nearly 60% of the time 1 day after the FFE, and 50% of the time 2 weeks later. Furthermore, successful uptake in a FFE was found to be a significant predictor of correct test scores. These results suggest that incidental focus on form might be beneficial to learners, particularly if they incorporate the targeted linguistic items into their own production.This research was supported, in part, by a scholarship from the Foundation for Science, Research, and Technology, New Zealand. The author would like to thank the teachers and participants who kindly gave of their time to participate in this study. The author would also like to thank Rod Ellis, Catherine Elder, Helen Basturkmen, Rosemary…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0272263105050163

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Loewen (2005) reported that successful uptake was the most significant variable predicting learning as measured in tailor-made tests of the linguistic forms addressed during the form-focused episodes.

    “Successful uptake, of course, cannot be equated with acquisition but in another study Loewen (2005) reported that successful uptake was the most significant variable predicting learning as measured in tailor-made tests of those linguistic forms that were addressed during the FFEs.”

    From Position paper: Moving task-based language teaching forward (2017) · cites this paper as Loewen (2005)

  • Even speaking tasks can be carried out through teacher-class interaction.

    “Even speaking tasks can be conducted through teacher-class interaction, as illustrated in Ellis, Basturkmen and Loewen (2001) and Loewen (2005).”

    From Position paper: Moving task-based language teaching forward (2017) · cites this paper as Loewen (2005)

  • Incidental focus on form does promote L2 learning (Loewen 2005).

    “While incidental focus on form does promote L2 learning (Loewen 2005), learning of different linguistic features can be facilitated by providing learners with focused tasks.”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Loewen 2005

  • Studies of uptake have looked at how learners responded to corrective feedback during meaning-focused interaction to find evidence of noticing in interactional discourse.

    “This is what studies of uptake have done (e.g.Ellis et al. 2001a;Loewen 2005) when they have looked at how learners responded to corrective feedback that was provided during meaning-focused interaction.”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Loewen 2005

  • Studies by J. Williams (2001) and Loewen (2005) provide evidence that temporary shifts in attention happen with some frequency in task-based interactions and can lead to learning.

    “Studies by J. Williams (2001) and Loewen (2005) provide evidence that this happens with some frequency in task-based interactions and can lead to learning.”

    From Focus on form: A critical review (2016) · cites this paper as Loewen (2005)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 52 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Loewen, S.
Affiliations
University of Auckland (NZ)
Corresponding author
Loewen, Shawn
ORCID
Loewen, Shawn
Venue
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2005-07-22
Volume
27
Issue
03
ISSN
  • 0272-2631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-1545
DOI
10.1017/s0272263105050163
OpenAlex
W2073789142
Cited by
381
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 24
FWCI
74.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Studies in Second Language Acquisition (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (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
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
Keywords
second language acquisition, uptake, young adult learners

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