CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 42

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The status of metalinguistic knowledge in instructed adult L2 learning

Roehr, Karen, Gánem-Gutiérrez, Gábriela Adela·2009·Language Awareness
DOI 10.1080/09658410902855854
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study investigated second language metalinguistic knowledge, or explicit knowledge about the second language, in English-speaking university-level learners of German and Spanish. The status of metalinguistic knowledge in relation to the individual difference variables of language-learning aptitude, working memory for language, and participants' language-learning history was identified. Language-learning experience in formal settings was found to be the strongest predictor for levels of metalinguistic knowledge attained by the participants. Moreover, it was found that despite a significant relationship with language-learning aptitude, metalinguistic knowledge is separable and distinct from both aptitude and working memory. In conclusion, suggestions for further research are put forward.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09658410902855854

Cites

5 of 5 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?

  • At least some components of working memory are weakly related to at least some components of aptitude.

    “First, (at least some) components of WM are (weakly) related to (at least some) components of aptitude (e.g., Li, 2016;Roehr & Gánem-Gutiérrez, 2009;Yoshimura, 2001)”

    From Aptitude for Explicit and Implicit Learning (2024) · cites this paper as Roehr & Gánem-Gutiérrez, 2009

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 52

  1. 10.1177/136216889700100202 · DOI
  2. Anderson J. R., 2005, Cognitive psychology and its implications,
  3. 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1979.tb01053.x · DOI
  4. 10.1017/S0272263100012857 · DOI
  5. Bialystok E., 1985, Merrill-Palmer Quarterly., 31, 229
  6. Birdsong D., 1989, Metalinguistic performance and interlinguistic competence, 10.1007/978-3-642-74124-1 · DOI
  7. 10.1017/S0272263102003042 · DOI
  8. Carroll J. B., 1962, Training research and education, 87
  9. Carroll J. B., 1990, Language aptitude reconsidered, 11
  10. Carroll J. B., 2002, Modern language aptitude test: MLAT
  11. Collentine J., 2000, Language Learning and Technology., 3, 44
  12. Colman A., 2006, A crash course in SPSS for Windows,
  13. 10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6 · DOI · Paper page
  14. DeKeyser R. M., 2003, The handbook of second language acquisition, 313
  15. 10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00294.x · DOI
  16. Dörnyei Z., 2005, The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition
  17. 10.1002/9780470756492.ch18 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.2307/329394 · DOI
  19. 10.1080/09658410408667092 · DOI
  20. Elder C., 1999, Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 81, 10.1075/aral.22.1.04eld · DOI
  21. 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00255.x · DOI
  22. Ellis N. C., 1996, The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49, 134, 10.1080/713755662 · DOI
  23. 10.1191/1362168805lr161oa · DOI · Paper page
  24. Gathercole S. E., 1998, Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention, 141
  25. 10.1093/applin/13.2.168 · DOI
  26. 10.1017/S0272263197003045 · DOI
  27. 10.1017/S0272263100010457 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Hatch E., 1991, The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics
  29. 10.1017/S0272263102003017 · DOI
  30. 10.1017/S0272263105050084 · DOI
  31. 10.1080/09658419908667129 · DOI
  32. Jessner U., 2006, Linguistic awareness in multilinguals: English as a third language, 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748619139.001.0001 · DOI
  33. 10.1191/1362168803lr128oa · DOI
  34. 10.1191/1362168806lr197oa · DOI
  35. 10.1177/026553229501200306 · DOI
  36. Miyake A., 1998, Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention, 339
  37. Pallant J., 2005, SPSS survival manual,
  38. 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2000.tb00909.x · DOI
  39. 10.1191/026765801681495877 · DOI
  40. 10.1017/S0267190505000036 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.2167/la403.0 · DOI
  42. 10.1515/COG.2008.005 · DOI
  43. 10.1093/applin/amm037 · DOI
  44. Sasaki M., 1996, Second language proficiency, foreign language aptitude, and intelligence
  45. Sawyer M., 2001, Cognition and second language instruction, 319, 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.013 · DOI
  46. Shah P., 1999, Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control, 1, 10.1017/CBO9781139174909.004 · DOI
  47. Skehan P., 1986, Experimental approaches to second language learning, 81
  48. Skehan P., 1989, Individual differences in second-language learning
  49. Skehan P., 1998, A cognitive approach to language learning
  50. Skehan P., 2002, Individual differences and instructed language learning, 69, 10.1075/lllt.2.06ske · DOI · Paper page
  51. 10.1093/applin/6.3.239 · DOI
  52. 10.1017/S026719050100006X · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Roehr, K., & Gánem-Gutiérrez, G. A.
Venue
Language Awareness
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2009-08-03
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
165-181
ISSN
  • 0965-8416
  • 1747-7565
DOI
10.1080/09658410902855854
Cited by
42
References
5
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