CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 536EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and LearningLinguistics and Language Analysis

Feedback, Noticing and Instructed Second Language Learning

Mackey, Alison·2006·Applied Linguistics
DOI 10.1093/applin/ami051
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Second language acquisition researchers have claimed that feedback provided during conversational interaction facilitates second language (L2) acquisition. A number of experimental studies have supported this claim, connecting interactional feedback with L2 development. Researchers have suggested that interactional feedback is associated with L2 learning because it prompts learners to notice L2 forms. This study explores the relationships between feedback, instructed ESL learners’ noticing of L2 form during classroom interactions and their subsequent L2 development. Interactional feedback was provided to learners in response to their production problems with questions, plurals, and past tense forms. Learners’ noticing was assessed through on-line learning journals, introspective comments while viewing classroom videotapes, and questionnaire responses. Through a controlled pre-test, post-test design, analyses of noticing and learning were carried out for each learner. The results point to an interesting, complex and positive relationship between interactional feedback in the classroom, the learners’ reports about noticing and their learning of L2 question forms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/applin/ami051

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Investigation into the effects of interaction on L2 development has been considered a component of instructed second language acquisition (ISLA).

    “Investigation into the effects of interaction on L2 development has been considered a component of instructed second language acquisition (ISLA) (e.g.Mackey 2006;Loewen 2015;Long 2017;VanPatten 2017b), which is concerned with the manipulation of the processes and mechanisms of L2 learning.”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Mackey 2006

  • Learners' attention is drawn to certain features more than others when there is no external manipulation, regardless of the target language.

    “This difficulty is evident from a body of research revealing that learners' attention is drawn to certain features more than others when there is no external manipulation, regardless of the target language (e.g.English : Mackey 2006;French: Ayoun 2001;Japanese: Loschky 1994).”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Mackey 2006

  • Mackey (2006) found some correspondence and discrepancies among noticing identified by different measures, leading her to suggest that noticing might be best viewed as a continuum.

    “Mackey also found that while there was some correspondence in the noticing identified by the different measures, there were also discrepancies, leading her to suggest that noticing might be best viewed as a continuum.”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Mackey (2006)

  • Mackey (2006) found that learners' reports of noticing related to linguistic development in some areas (e.g., questions) but not in others (e.g., past tense).

    “She found that learners' reports of noticing related to linguistic development in some areas (e.g.questions) but not in others (e.g.past tense).”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Mackey (2006)

  • There is also evidence to suggest that when focus on form leads to learners consciously attending to linguistic forms they are more likely to learn what they have attended to.

    “However, there is also evidence to suggest that when the focus on form leads to learners consciously attending to linguistic forms they are more likely to learn what they have attended to (Mackey, 2006).”

    From Focus on form: A critical review (2016) · cites this paper as Mackey, 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 75 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mackey, A.
Affiliations
Georgetown University (US)
Corresponding author
Mackey, Alison
ORCID
Mackey, Alison
Venue
Applied Linguistics
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2006-09-01
Volume
27
Issue
3
Pages
405-430
ISSN
  • 0142-6001 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-450X
DOI
10.1093/applin/ami051
OpenAlex
W2101121875
Cited by
536
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 55 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 37
FWCI
116.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Applied Linguistics (publishedVersion)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (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
interactional feedback, noticing, second language acquisition, English as a second language, classroom interaction, question forms, plural nouns, past tense, learner journals, introspective reports

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