Cited by 50

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Age and learning environment: Are children implicit second language learners?

LICHTMAN, KAREN·2016·Journal of Child Language

Abstract

Children are thought to learn second languages (L2s) using primarily implicit mechanisms, in contrast to adults, who primarily rely on explicit language learning. This difference is usually attributed to cognitive maturation, but adults also receive more explicit instruction than children, which may influence their learning strategies. This study crosses instruction condition with age, teaching forty children aged 5;3 to 7;11 and forty adults an artificial mini-language under implicit or explicit training conditions. Participants produced novel sentences and judged sentence grammaticality equally well in either condition, but both children and adults in the explicit training condition developed greater awareness of the mini-language's structures – and greater awareness was associated with better performance for both age groups. Results show that explicit instruction affects children and adults in the same way, supporting the hypothesis that age differences in implicit vs. explicit L2 learning are not exclusively caused by maturation, but also influenced by instruction.

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/s0305000915000598

Cites

3 of 3 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

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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. 10.1044/1092-4388(2007/090) · DOI
  2. Bley-Vroman, 1990, The logical problem of foreign language learning, Linguistic Analysis, 20, 3
  3. Lenneberg, 1967, Biological foundations of language, 10.1080/21548331.1967.11707799 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Unsworth, 2005, On the syntax–semantics interface in Dutch: adult and child L2 acquisition compared, International Review of Applied Linguistics, 42, 173
  5. Schmidt, 1994, Implicit and explicit learning of languages, 165
  6. Krashen, 1982, Child–adult differences in second language acquisition
  7. 10.1075/lald.46.14blo · DOI
  8. Dunn, 2007, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
  9. 10.1044/1058-0360(2009/08-0041) · DOI
  10. Schwartz, 2004, Proceedings of Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition 2003, 47
  11. 10.1017/S0142716404001134 · DOI
  12. Muñoz, 2006, Age and the rate of foreign language learning, 10.21832/9781853598937 · DOI
  13. Ellis, 2009, Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing, and teaching, 3, 10.21832/9781847691767-003 · DOI
  14. 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00554.x · DOI
  15. 10.1075/sibil.18 · DOI
  16. DeKeyser, 2005, Handbook of bilingualism: psycholinguistic approaches, 88
  17. 10.1017/S0272263197002064 · DOI
  18. DeKeyser, 2000, The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499, 10.1017/S0272263100004022 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.1371/journal.pone.0013648 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1044/jshr.3801.168 · DOI
  21. 10.1017/S0142716410000056 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Curtain, 2010, Languages and children: making the match. New languages for young learners, grades K-8
  23. 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2009.01.001 · DOI
  24. 10.1017/S027226310001425X · DOI
  25. 10.1075/sibil.40 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Zdorenko, 2011, Articles in child L2 English: when L1 and L2 acquisition meet at the interface, First Language, 1, 1
  27. Bialystok, 1994, Implicit and explicit learning of languages, 549
  28. 10.1017/S1366728901000220 · DOI
  29. 10.1075/sibil.39 · DOI
  30. DeKeyser, 2003, Handbook of second language acquisition, 313
  31. Housen, 2006, Investigations in instructed second language acquisition, 1
  32. 10.1111/j.1467-1770.2001.tb00017.x · DOI
  33. Singleton, 2004, Language acquisition: the age factor, 10.21832/9781853597596 · DOI
  34. Torras, 2006, Age and the rate of foreign language learning, 156, 10.21832/9781853598937-009 · DOI
  35. Larson-Hall, 2010, A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS
  36. 10.1017/S0142716403000079 · DOI
  37. 10.1007/978-3-642-74124-1 · DOI
  38. 10.1017/S0272263199004015 · DOI
  39. 10.1016/0010-0285(89)90003-0 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Harley, 1998, French second language education in Canada: empirical studies, 177
  41. 10.1515/IRAL.2008.009 · DOI
  42. 10.1080/10489223.2013.766740 · DOI
  43. 10.1191/0265659007072143 · DOI
  44. Morgan-Short K. (2007). A neurolinguistic investigation of late-learned second language knowledge: the effects of implicit and explicit conditions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University.

Metadata

Authors
LICHTMAN, K.
Venue
Journal of Child Language
Published
2016-02-26
Volume
43
Issue
3
Pages
707-730
ISSN
  • 0305-0009
  • 1469-7602
Cited by
50
References
3
Language
en

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