Effects of Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Acquisition of Third-Person Singular Form and the Mediating Role of Cognitive Style
- 62 Downloads
The present study investigated the effectiveness of recasts and prompts on the acquisition of the English third-person singular form and the mediating role of cognitive style on the effects of feedback. One hundred and seventy-five college students from four intact classes were assigned to four groups: form-focused instruction with recast (FFI-recast), FFI with prompt (FFI-prompt), FFI, and control. The group embedded figures test (Witkin et al. in Rev Educ Res 47:1–64, 1977) was adopted to test learners’ cognitive style (field dependence/independence). The results show that the FFI-prompt group outperformed the FFI-recast group and the control group on the immediate post-test; the FFI-prompt group also achieved significantly higher scores than the other groups on the delayed post-test in the written test. However, no significant difference was found among groups in the text-completion test. Regression analyses reveal that in the text-completion test, field dependence/independence mediates the effect of recasts on the immediate post-test.
KeywordsRecasts Prompts Cognitive style Form-focused instruction
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
We declare that we have no conflict of interest with any other people or organizations.
We declare that our study complies with the ethical standards of the journal.
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 (5). Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.
- Algarawi, B. (2010). The effects of repair techniques on L2 learning as a product and as process: A CA-for-SLA investigation of classroom interaction. Ph.D dissertation, University of Newcastle Upon Tyne.Google Scholar
- Darabad, A. (2013). Oral accuracy, field independent/dependent cognitive style, and corrective feedback. International Journal of English Language Education, 1(1), 204–221.Google Scholar
- Ellis, R. (1999). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Loewen, S., & Nabei, T. (2007). Measuring the effects of oral corrective feedback on L2 knowledge. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 361–377). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Mackey, A., Philp, J., Egi, T., Fujii, A., & Tatsumi, T. (2002). Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback and L2 development. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 181–209). Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Naiman, M., Frohlich, M., Stern, H., & Todesco, A. (1978). The good language learner. Research in Education Series No. 7. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.Google Scholar
- Sauro, S. (2009). Computer-mediated feedback and the development of L2 grammar. Language Learning and Technology, 13(1), 96–120.Google Scholar
- Sheen, Y. (2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
- Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In B. Seidlhofer (Ed.) Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Tucker, G., Hamayan, E., & Genesee, F. (1976). Affective, cognitive and social factors in second language acquisition. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 32, 214–226.Google Scholar
- Wu, Y., & Liu, R. (1993). A survey of Chinese English majors’ language performance. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 1, 36–46.Google Scholar
- Xu, W. (1999). Field dependence/independence and college English teaching. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 4, 51–52.Google Scholar
- Yang, Y., & Yu, Y. (2016). Effects of feedback type and task involvement load on vocabulary development. Modern Foreign Languages, 39(3), 408–417.Google Scholar
- Zhu, Z. (2002). The impact of field dependence/independence on foreign language learning. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 4, 28–31.Google Scholar