Cited by 195EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and LearningLinguistics and Language Analysis

THE IMPACT OF COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY ON FEEDBACK EFFICACY DURING ONLINE VERSUS FACE-TO-FACE INTERACTIVE TASKS

Baralt, Melissa·2013·Studies in Second Language Acquisition

Abstract

Informed by the cognition hypothesis (Robinson, 2011), recent studies indicate that more cognitively complex tasks can result in better incorporation of feedback during interaction and, as a consequence, more learning. It is not known, however, how task complexity and feedback work together in computerized environments. The present study addressed this gap by investigating how cognitive complexity in face-to-face (FTF) versus computer-mediated communication (CMC) environments mediates the efficacy of recasts in promoting second language development. Eighty-four adult learners of Spanish as a foreign language at a mid-Atlantic university were randomly assigned to a control group or one of four experimental groups. The experimental groups engaged in one-on-one interaction and received recasts on the Spanish past subjunctive but differed according to (a) whether or not they had to reflect on another person’s intentional reasons during the task and (b) whether they interacted in FTF or CMC environments. Learning was measured with two production tasks and a multiple-choice receptive test in a Pretest-Posttest 1-Posttest 2 design. Results revealed that in the FTF mode, performing the cognitively complex task while receiving recasts led to the most learning. In the CMC mode, the cognitively complex task + recasts was not effective. Instead, the cognitively simple task led to the most development in CMC. The study also found that judgments of time on task were the only independent me…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0272263113000429

Cites

3 of 3 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?

  • Some features of online language teaching platforms may even enhance the language learning process, such as more noticing of corrective feedback.

    “In fact, some features of online language teaching platforms may even enhance the language learning process, such as more noticing of corrective feedback (e.g., Baralt, 2013;Gleason, 2013;Gurzynski-Weiss & Baralt, 2015;Sykes, 2005;Thomas & Reinders, 2012;Thorne, 2008; see also Loewen & Wolff, 2016).”

    From Task-based language teaching online: A guide for teachers (2017) · cites this paper as Baralt, 2013

  • Tasks that work well in person do not always work well online.

    “(a) tasks that work well in person do not always work well online (Baralt, 2013(Baralt, , 2014));”

    From Task-based language teaching online: A guide for teachers (2017) · cites this paper as Baralt, 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baralt, M.
Affiliations
Florida International University (US)
Corresponding author
Baralt, Melissa
Venue
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
Published
2013-08-23
Volume
35
Issue
4
Pages
689-725
ISSN
  • 0272-2631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-1545
OpenAlex
W2128659484
Cited by
195
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 3
FWCI
95.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Studies in Second Language Acquisition (publishedVersion)
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
cognitive complexity, recasts, computer-mediated communication, face-to-face interaction, second language acquisition, Spanish as a foreign language, task complexity, student reflection, time on task, Cognition Hypothesis

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