The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
INCIDENTAL FOCUS ON FORM AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING
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…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“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)
In the citing paper
“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)
In the citing paper
“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
In the citing paper
“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
In the citing paper
“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)
In the citing paper
“Both focus on form initiated by learners in learner-learner interaction and by teachers in whole-class interaction benefit acquisition (J.Williams, 2001;Loewen, 2005).”
From Focus on form: A critical review (2016) · cites this paper as Loewen, 2005
Citations
Cites
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-3338 · Cited by 35,305
The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning1
SCHMIDT, R. W. (1990) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/11.2.129 · Cited by 5,435 · cited 1×
“…that might otherwise go unnoticed in entirely meaning-focused lessons ~Ellis et al+, 2001a; Schmidt, 2001; Skehan, 1998!+ In addition to its ability to help induce noticing of linguistic items in the input—which is argued to be essential for L2 development ~Gass, 1997; Schmidt, 1990, 1995, 2001!”
BackgroundApproaches and Methods in Language Teaching
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511667305 · Cited by 4,414
The Role of the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition
Long, M. H. (1996) · Handbook of Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1016/b978-012589042-7/50015-3 · Cited by 3,927
A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning
Garcia, P., & Skehan, P. (1999) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3587891 · Cited by 3,489
(1985) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,037
CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AND LEARNER UPTAKE: Negotiation of Form in Communicative Classrooms
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263197001034 · Cited by 2,629 · cited 3×
“…Broadly, this response can consist of either the provision or elicitation of linguistic information ~Ellis et al+, 2001a, 2001b; Lyster, 1998a, 1998b; Lyster & Ranta, 1997!+ Within these broad response categories are specific types of response moves+ For example, the provision of linguistic…”
BackgroundResult(1998) · Cited by 2,572
KENYON, D. M., Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1998) · Modern Language Journal · doi:10.2307/328718 · Cited by 2,323
Cognition and Second Language Instruction
Robinson, P. J. (2001) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139524780 · Cited by 1,776
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Task‐based language teaching: sorting out the misunderstandings
Ellis, R. (2009) · International Journal of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1111/j.1473-4192.2009.00231.x · Cited by 1,031
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
INTERACTIONAL FEEDBACK AND INSTRUCTIONAL COUNTERBALANCE
Lyster, R., & Mori, H. (2006) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263106060128 · Cited by 506
Focus on form: A critical review
Ellis, R. (2016) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/1362168816628627 · Cited by 417
Recasts in the Adult English L2 Classroom: Characteristics, Explicitness, and Effectiveness
LOEWEN, S., & PHILP, J. (2006) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00465.x · Cited by 408
Self-citation
Metadata
- 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
- 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
