Cited by 498EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningLinguistics and Language AnalysisSecond Language Acquisition and Learning

"Information Gap" Tasks: Do They Facilitate Second Language Acquisition?

Doughty, Catherine, Pica, Teresa·1986·TESOL Quarterly

Abstract

This article reports the findings of the latest of a series of studies conducted to determine the effects of task type and participation pattern on language classroom interaction. The results of this study are compared to those of an earlier investigation (Pica & Doughty, 1985a) in regard to optional and required information exchange tasks across teacher-directed, small-group, and dyad interactional patterns. The evidence suggests that a task with a requirement for information exchange is crucial to the generation of conversational modification of classroom interaction. This finding is significant in light of current theory, which argues that conversational modification occurring during interaction is instrumental in second language acquisition. Furthermore, the finding that group and dyad interaction patterns produced more modification than did the teacher-fronted situation suggests that participation pattern as well as task type have an effect on the conversational modification of interaction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3586546

Cites

12 of 12 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?

  • Apart from interlocutor characteristics, there are numerous task features that may impact interaction.

    “Apart from interlocutor characteristics, there are numerous task features that may impact interaction (e.g.Doughty & Pica 1986;Robinson 2001;Pica 2005;Keck et al. 2006;Pica, Kang & Sauro 2006;Kim 2008;Tavakoli & Foster 2008;Jenks 2009;Kormos & Trebits 2012).”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Doughty & Pica 1986

  • The ways in which information is distributed among learners, and the ways in which they must exchange information can impact learner interaction.

    “The ways in which information is distributed among learners, and the ways in which they must exchange information can impact learner interaction (Doughty & Pica 1986;Foster & Skehan 1996;Ellis 2003;Pica et al. 2006;Gilabert, Barón & Llanes 2009).”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Doughty & Pica 1986

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Doughty, C., & Pica, T.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Venue
TESOL Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1986-06
Volume
20
Issue
2
Pages
305
ISSN
0039-8322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2031796137
Cited by
498
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 17
FWCI
41.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
TESOL Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Pennsylvania
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
Keywords
information-gap tasks, second language acquisition, classroom interaction, task type, participation patterns, small group interaction, dyadic interaction

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