Cited by 44

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

Foreign language aptitude, acquisitional sequences, and psycholinguistic processes

Skehan, Peter·2016·Bilingual Processing and Acquisition

Abstract

This chapter has two broad aims: to relate aptitude tests and recent aptitude research, including that reported in this volume, to proposed second language acquisition stages; and to relate aptitude testing to the contrasts between domain-generality and domain-specificity, on the one hand, and explicit and implicit processes, on the other. Regarding SLA stages, a broad distinction is made between stages concerned with developing knowledge and those concerned with developing control. It is argued that aptitude tests have concentrated on the first and that there is scope to develop more aptitude tests to assess the second. Regarding the two major contrasts, it is argued that analysing aptitude tests in these terms is useful as a means of indicating what underlying theories they have. In that respect it is interesting that the most recent major battery (HiLAB: domain-general, often implicit) contrasts with older batteries (e.g. MLAT: domain specific, explicit). It is argued that aptitude tests, viewed in this way, can make theoretical contributions to second language acquisition more generally in characterising what language learning abilities consist of.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1075/bpa.3.02ske

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. Anderson, 2010, Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications
  2. 10.1075/lllt.35.08bol · DOI
  3. Carroll, 1965, The prediction of success in intensive foreign language training, 87
  4. Carroll, 1973, Implications of aptitude test research and psycholinguistic theory for foreign language teaching, International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 2, 5
  5. Chan, 2011, Working memory, phonemic coding ability and foreign language aptitude: Potential for construction of specific language aptitude tests—the case of Cantonese, Ilha Do Desterro: A Journal of English language, literatures and cultural studies, 60, 45
  6. Clark, 1977, Psychology and Language
  7. 10.1017/S0272263197002064 · DOI
  8. De Keyser, 2000, The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499, 10.1017/S0272263100004022 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1017/CBO9780511667275.016 · DOI
  10. 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00736.x · DOI
  11. 10.1075/lllt.11.03ell · DOI
  12. Ellis, 2009, Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language, 31
  13. Ellis, 2015, Understanding second language acquisition
  14. Ellis, 2014, Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research
  15. 10.1017/S0272263112000149 · DOI
  16. 10.1111/lang.12018 · DOI
  17. 10.1177/0267658312461497 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1075/lllt.35 · DOI
  19. 10.1111/0026-7902.00076 · DOI
  20. 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00477.x · DOI
  21. 10.1093/applin/amu054 · DOI
  22. 10.1111/lang.12011 · DOI
  23. 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.005 · DOI
  24. MacWhinney, 2005, A unified model of language acquisition, 49
  25. Meara, 2005, LLAMA Language Aptitude Tests: The Manual
  26. Mackey, 2007, Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis, 407
  27. Miyake, 1998, Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude, 339
  28. 10.1111/lang.12010 · DOI
  29. 10.1017/S0272263100014674 · DOI · Paper page
  30. 10.1017/CBO9780511667275.015 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Sasaki, 1996, Second language proficiency, foreign language aptitude, and intelligence. Quantitative and qualitative analyses
  32. Skehan, 1982, Memory and motivation in language aptitude testing
  33. Skehan, 1986, Where does language aptitude come from?, 95
  34. Skehan, 1989, Individual differences in second language learning
  35. 10.1093/applin/17.1.38 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Skehan, 1998, A cognitive approach to language learning
  37. 10.1075/lllt.2.06ske · DOI · Paper page
  38. Skehan, 2012, Language aptitude, 381
  39. Skehan, 2013, Nurturing noticing, 169
  40. Skehan, 2013, The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics
  41. 10.1075/tblt.5.08ske · DOI · Paper page
  42. 10.1075/tblt.5 · DOI
  43. 10.1093/applin/amu072 · DOI
  44. 10.1075/lllt.35.02spa · DOI
  45. Ullman, 2005, A cognitive neuroscience perspective on second language acquisition: The declarative/ procedural model, 141
  46. 10.1111/j.1473-4192.2011.00290.x · DOI
  47. Wesche, 1981, Language aptitude measures in streaming, matching students with methods, and diagnosis of learning problems, 119
  48. Wray, 2008, Formulaic language: Pushing the boundaries

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Skehan, P.
Affiliations
St. Mary’s University, Twickenham
Venue
Bilingual Processing and Acquisition
Published
2016-12-02
Pages
17-40
ISSN
2352-0531
Cited by
44
References
2
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