The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Focus on Form Through Interaction Enhancement: Integrating Formal Instruction Into a Communicative Task in EFL Classrooms
Abstract
This study examines the impact of interaction enhancement (IE) on the learning of English articles. IE is a treatment that guides learners to focus on form by providing interactional modifications and leads learners to produce modified output within a problem‐solving task (strategic interaction). Two different IE treatments were employed: IE plus formal debriefing (IEF), and IE plus meaning‐focused debriefing (IEM). Outcomes of these treatments were compared with the effects of non‐enhanced interaction in a quasi‐experimental study involving 91 Japanese EFL learners. Progress was measured with a pretest and two post‐tests, yielding these major findings: (1) IE had positive effects on the learning of English articles; (2) the IEF treatment had a greater impact than the IEM treatment.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning1
SCHMIDT, R. W. (1990) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/11.2.129 · Cited by 5,435 · cited 2×
“The theoretical underpinnings of IE are cognitive models of L2 acquisition (e.g., DeKeyser, 1998; R. Ellis, 1997; Gass, 1988; McLaughlin, 1987, 1990; Schmidt, 1990; Skehan, 1998).”
BackgroundCORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AND LEARNER UPTAKE: Negotiation of Form in Communicative Classrooms
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263197001034 · Cited by 2,629
Focus on Form: A Design Feature in Language Teaching Methodology
Long, M. (1991) · Studies in Bilingualism · doi:10.1075/sibil.2.07lon · Cited by 1,775 · cited 2×
“Long, Inagaki, and Ortega (1998) reported the results of two experiments conducted to assess the relative utility of models and recasts in L2 Japanese and Spanish.”
BackgroundResultSWAIN, M., & LAPKIN, S. (1995) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/16.3.371 · Cited by 1,407
INPUT, INTERACTION, AND SECOND LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT: An Empirical Study of Question Formation in ESL
Mackey, A. (1999) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263199004027 · Cited by 772
RECASTS, REPETITION, AND AMBIGUITY IN L2 CLASSROOM DISCOURSE
Lyster, R. (1998) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s027226319800103x · Cited by 718
Doughty, C. (1991) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263100010287 · Cited by 619
THE ROLES OF MODIFIED INPUT AND OUTPUT IN THE INCIDENTAL ACQUISITION OF WORD MEANINGS
Ellis, R., & He, X. (1999) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263199002077 · Cited by 449
Using collaborative language production tasks to promote students’ language awareness1
Kowal, M., & Swain, M. (1994) · Language Awareness · doi:10.1080/09658416.1994.9959845 · Cited by 332
Rules and instances in foreign language learning: Interactions of explicit and implicit knowledge
Ellis, N. (1993) · European Journal of Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1080/09541449308520120 · Cited by 269
Cited by
IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AND THE ACQUISITION OF L2 GRAMMAR
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263106060141 · Cited by 1,076
ORAL FEEDBACK IN CLASSROOM SLA: A Meta-Analysis
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263109990520 · Cited by 838
Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00562.x · Cited by 746
RECASTS AND SECOND LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT: Beyond Negative Evidence
Leeman, J. (2003) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263103000020 · Cited by 406
Attention and Memory during SLA
Robinson, P. (2003) · The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1002/9780470756492.ch19 · Cited by 402
Metadata
- Authors
- Muranoi, H.
- Venue
- Language Learning
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-12
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 617-673
- ISSN
- 0023-8333 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9922
- OpenAlex
- W2114612264
- Cited by
- 252
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 41.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
