The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prompts Versus Recasts in Dyadic Interaction
Open accessAbstract
This study investigated the differential effects of prompts and recasts, in the context of dyadic interaction, on the acquisition of grammatical gender by adult second language learners of French. Participants were 25 undergraduate students enrolled in an intermediate‐level French course at an English‐speaking university. All students were exposed in class to a 3‐hr form‐focused instructional treatment distributed over 2 weeks and were then randomly placed in either the recast or prompt group. On two occasions outside of class, individual students participated in three different oral tasks during dyadic interaction with a native or near‐native speaker of French who, following learner errors in grammatical gender, provided feedback in the form of either prompts or recasts. Pretests and immediate and delayed posttests included two oral production tasks and a computerized reaction‐time binary‐choice test. Results of repeated‐measures ANOVA showed that both groups significantly improved accuracy and reaction‐time scores over time, irrespective of feedback type. We conclude that learners receiving recasts benefited from the repeated exposure to positive exemplars as well as from opportunities to infer negative evidence, whereas learners receiving prompts benefited from the repeated exposure to negative evidence as well as from opportunities to produce modified output.
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
Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.127 · Cited by 7,335
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 2,629
Self-citationDIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF PROMPTS AND RECASTS IN FORM-FOCUSED INSTRUCTION
Lyster, R. (2004) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263104263021 · Cited by 826
Self-citationRECASTS, REPETITION, AND AMBIGUITY IN L2 CLASSROOM DISCOURSE
Lyster, R. (1998) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s027226319800103x · Cited by 718
Self-citationSpada, N. (1997) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444800012799 · Cited by 632
Gass, S. M. (2003) · The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1002/9780470756492.ch9 · Cited by 542
ONE SIZE FITS ALL?: Recasts, Prompts, and L2 Learning
Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263106060268 · Cited by 541
Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form
Doughty, C. (2001) · Cognition and Second Language Instruction · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139524780.010 · Cited by 523
INTERACTIONAL FEEDBACK AND INSTRUCTIONAL COUNTERBALANCE
Lyster, R., & Mori, H. (2006) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263106060128 · Cited by 506
Self-citationA Classroom Perspective on the Negotiation of Meaning
FOSTER, P. (1998) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/19.1.1 · Cited by 437
Cited by
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
Self-citationOral corrective feedback in second language classrooms
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444812000365 · Cited by 741
Self-citationPlonsky (2013) · doi:10.1017/s0272263113000399 · Cited by 347
Yang, Y., & Lyster, R. (2010) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263109990519 · Cited by 344
Self-citationRecasts, language anxiety, modified output, and L2 learning
Sheen, Y. (2008) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00480.x · Cited by 330
THE CASE AGAINST THE CASE AGAINST RECASTS
Goo, J., & Mackey, A. (2013) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263112000708 · Cited by 271
Sato, M., & Loewen, S. (2018) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12283 · Cited by 195
An A–Z of Applied Linguistics Research Methods
Loewen, S., & Plonsky, L. (2016) · doi:10.1007/978-1-137-40322-3 · Cited by 156
VAN DE GUCHTE, M., BRAAKSMA, M., RIJLAARSDAM, G., & BIMMEL, P. (2015) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/modl.12211 · Cited by 75
(2014) · TSpace (University of Toronto) · Cited by 53
Participation Structure and Incidental Focus on Form in Adult ESL Classrooms
Nassaji, H. (2013) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12020 · Cited by 50
The Occurrence and Effectiveness of Spontaneous Focus on Form in Adult ESL Classrooms
Nassaji, H. (2010) · The Canadian Modern Language Review · doi:10.3138/cmlr.66.6.907 · Cited by 48
The Relative Effectiveness of Corrective Feedback in Classroom Interaction
Lyster, R. (2015) · The Handbook of Classroom Discourse and Interaction · doi:10.1002/9781118531242.ch13 · Cited by 16
Self-citationLee, A. H. (2024) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/13621688211051032 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Lyster, R., & Izquierdo, J.
- Venue
- Language Learning
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-05-08
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 453-498
- ISSN
- 0023-8333 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9922
- OpenAlex
- W2057793452
- Cited by
- 256
- References
- 18
- FWCI
- 146.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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.