The DOI matches its Crossref record; 92 of the 94 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Eye tracking as a measure of noticing: A study of explicit recasts in SCMC
Open accessAbstract
This study investigated whether eye-tracking technology could be employed as a measure of noticing of corrective feedback (in the form of explicit recasts) during NS-NNS taskbased synchronous computer-mediated communication (SCMC).Pairs of university-level learners of English (n = 18) engaged in a short chat interaction task with a native speaker, who provided intensive and explicit corrective recasts.Participants' eye gaze record was compared to that from a stimulated recall.Noticing events (increased visual attention) were compiled and compared from each technique to determine whether these two techniques yielded similar data.Noticing events from each technique were also compared to results of immediate and delayed post tests of the targeted items.Results confirm the strength of both measures as methods for measuring what learners notice in the corrective feedback during SCMC.Further, the eye tracking and stimulated recall data also suggest that although learners engage in similar amounts of viewing activity across recasts targeting various linguistic categories, they are able to notice semantic and syntactic targets more easily than morphological targets.Results are discussed in terms of eye tracking as a potentially valuable tool in exploring the nature of noticing in instructed SLA and also in terms of argued benefits of CMC for language learning.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“He found a strong, positive correlation between the two measures, with learners noticing semantic and syntactic features more than morphological ones.”
From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Smith 2012
Citations
Cites
1 retracted
Morris, F. A., & Tarone, E. E. (2003) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/1467-9922.00219 · Cited by 69
RetractedEye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research
Rayner, K. (1998) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372 · Cited by 7,979
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
The Role of the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition
Long, M. H. (1996) · Handbook of Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1016/b978-012589042-7/50015-3 · Cited by 3,927
A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.87.4.329 · Cited by 3,904
Rayner, K. (2009) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470210902816461 · Cited by 2,682
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 · cited 4×
“And over the past fifteen years recasts have become one of the most widely studied types of corrective feedback in the second/foreign language (L2) classroom (Braidi, 2002; Doughty, 1994; Lyster & Ranta, 1997; Nabei & Swain, 2002; Oliver, 1995; Sheen, 2004).”
BackgroundInfluential(1998) · Cited by 2,572
Handbook of Second Language Acquisition
Ritchie, W. C., & Bhatia, T. (1998) · Language · doi:10.2307/417479 · Cited by 2,383
Cognition and Second Language Instruction
Robinson, P. J. (2001) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139524780 · Cited by 1,771
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Technology in Language Use, Language Teaching, and Language Learning
Chun, D. M., Kern, R., & SMITH, B. K. (2016) · Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/modl.12302 · Cited by 570
Self-citationTask-Based Language Teaching: Theory and Practice
Ellis, R., Skehan, P., Li, S., Shintani, N., & Lambert, C. (2019) · doi:10.1017/9781108643689 · Cited by 407
Interaction and instructed second language acquisition
Loewen, S., & Sato, M. (2018) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444818000125 · Cited by 377
INCIDENTAL L2 VOCABULARY ACQUISITION FROM AND WHILE READING
Pellicer‐Sánchez, A. (2015) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263115000224 · Cited by 374
König, J., Santagata, R., Scheiner, T., Adleff, A.-K., Yang, X., & Kaiser, G. (2022) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100453 · Cited by 336
Metadata
- Authors
- Smith, B.
- Corresponding author
- Smith, Bryan
- Venue
- Language Learning & Technology
- Published
- 2012-10-01
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 53-81
- ISSN
- 1094-3501 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2169642153
- Cited by
- 177
- References
- 94
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 57.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Language learning & technology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa) (submittedVersion)
- Language learning & technology (cc-by-nc-nd)
- 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 › Education › English Language Learning and Teaching
- Keywords
- noticing, corrective feedback, eye tracking, synchronous computer-mediated communication, task-based language learning, stimulated recall, second language acquisition, chat 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
