Recasts as Feedback to Language Learners
Abstract
Some researchers suggest that recasts are effective in showing learners how their current interlanguage differs from the target (Long & Robinson, 1998). Others have argued that recasts are ambiguous and may be perceived by the learner as confirmation of meaning rather than feedback on form (Lyster, 1998a). We review research on the effectiveness of recasts in first and second language acquisition, paying particular attention to how recasts have been defined and how their impact has been assessed in observational and experimental studies. We conclude that recasts appear to be most effective in contexts where it is clear to the learner that the recast is a reaction to the accuracy of the form, not the content, of the original utterance.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Prior reviews and Mackey and Goo's meta-analysis indicate that corrective feedback effectiveness and learning outcomes differ notably between laboratory and classroom settings.
“the effectiveness of CF and subsequent learning outcomes are notably different in laboratory and classroom settings”
From ORAL FEEDBACK IN CLASSROOM SLA: A Meta-Analysis (2010) · cites this paper as Nicholas, Lightbown, & Spada, 2001
Recasts can be quite explicit depending on discourse context, instructional setting, learner orientation, and formal characteristics such as linguistic targets, length, and number of changes.
“depending on discourse context, instructional setting, and learner orientation as well as formal characteristics such as linguistic targets, length, and number of changes, recasts can also be quite explicit”
From ORAL FEEDBACK IN CLASSROOM SLA: A Meta-Analysis (2010) · cites this paper as Nicholas et al., 2001
Cites
The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning1
SCHMIDT, R. W. (1990) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/11.2.129 · Cited by 4,910 · see citing works
CORRECTIVE 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 2,259 · see citing works
Long, M. (1991) · Studies in Bilingualism · doi:10.1075/sibil.2.07lon · Cited by 1,775 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Doughty (1999) discusses cognitive explanations for the effectiveness of recasts as examples of focus on form (Long, 1991) in L2 learning.”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis
Li, S. (2010) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x · Cited by 941 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Focus on form: A critical review
Ellis, R. (2016) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/1362168816628627 · Cited by 417 · see citing works
INCIDENTAL FOCUS ON FORM AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING
Loewen, S. (2005) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263105050163 · Cited by 381 · see citing works
Recasts, language anxiety, modified output, and L2 learning
Sheen, Y. (2008) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00480.x · Cited by 330 · see citing works
Eye tracking as a measure of noticing: A study of explicit recasts in SCMC
Smith, B. (2012) · Language Learning & Technology · doi:10.64152/10125/44300 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
Egi, T. (2007) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263107070416 · Cited by 137 · see citing works
VAN DE GUCHTE, M., BRAAKSMA, M., RIJLAARSDAM, G., & BIMMEL, P. (2015) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/modl.12211 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Interactional feedback in learner-learner interactions in a task-based EFL classroom
Fujii, A., & Mackey, A. (2009) · IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching · doi:10.1515/iral.2009.012 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
American Sign Language Curricula: A Review
Rosen, R. S. (2010) · Sign Language Studies · doi:10.1353/sls.0.0050 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Lil-Bevo: Explorations of Strategies for Training Language Models in More Humanlike Ways
Govindarajan, V. S., Rodriguez, J. D., Bostrom, K., & Mahowald, K. (2023) · Proceedings of the BabyLM Challenge at the 27th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.conll-babylm.27 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N.
- Affiliations
- La Trobe University (AU)
- Concordia University (CA)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- ORCID
- Nicholas, Howard
- Venue
- Language Learning
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-12
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 719-758
- ISSN
- 0023-8333 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9922
- OpenAlex
- W2084614868
- Cited by
- 464
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 31
- FWCI
- 81.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language Learning (publishedVersion)
- 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
- recasts, feedback, second language acquisition, interlanguage, accuracy feedback, learner perceptions, corrective feedback, first language acquisition
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
