An Investigation of the Impact of Manipulation of Task Complexity on Cognitive Processes Into Both NS and Second Language Learners
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1204.26Keywords:
task-based learning, cognitive load, task complexity, speech production processesAbstract
This study takes as its basis a recognition that task-based learning is now recognized as having major benefits in promoting L2 learning, and how cognitive load affects speech production. In addition, there has been a recent examination of the impact of task complexity, real-world meaning, and the overall cognitive load needed to be expended by students. Different task types have been evaluated in terms of how they improve aspects of language. However, less consideration has been given to the effect on the cognitive load of different task types with the speech production processes (conceptualization, input, output identification, monitoring, and reformulations). Drawing on data collected from 112 participants (56 Native Speakers, 56 Non-Native Speakers) who completed a series of tests of varying complexity and were asked to evaluate on a rating scale, the level of mental effort expended. The results indicated that complexity increases mental effort and thus cognitive load, and that conceptualization appears to be one area where greater effort is required before being able to problems solving. Formulation comments suggest that there was a high level of hesitation, self-checking, and assessment as the level of task complexity increased. The implications for teaching and syllabus design are also considered.
References
Abdollahzadeh, S., & Fard Kashani, A. (2012). The effect of task complexity on EFL learners’ narrative writing task performance. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 3(8), pp.1-28
Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher education research & development, 34(1), pp.1-14.
Archard, M., & Niemeier, S. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics, Language Acquisition, and Pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Guyter
Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: looking back and looking forward. Nature reviews neuroscience, 4(10), pp.829-839.
Bowles, M.A. (2018). Introspective Verbal Reports: Think-Alouds and Stimulated Recall. In The Palgrave Handbook of Applied Linguistics Research Methodology (pp. 339-357). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Breen, M. P. (1987). Learner Contributions to task design. In C.N. Candlin and D. Murphy (eds.). Lunca.srer Practical Papers in English Language Education. Vol. 7. Language Learning Tasks, 23-46. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Cierniak, G., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2009). Explaining the split-attention effect: Is the reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in germane cognitive load? Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), pp.315-324.
Doughty, C., & Pica, T. (1986). Information gap tasks: An aid to SLA? . TESOL Quarterly, 20(2), pp. 305-325
Ellis, R. (2003). Task Based Language Teaching and Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2006). The methodology of task-based teaching. Asian EFL journal, 8(3), pp.19-45.
Farrokhi, F., & Sattarpour, S. (2017). Different Task Complexity Factors and Cognitive Individual Differences: The Effects on EFL Writers’ Performance Applied Research on English Language, 6(3), pp.387-410.
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2007). Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten and J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition, pp. 175-200. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gilabert, R., Barón, J., & Llanes, À. (2009). Manipulating cognitive complexity across task types and its impact on learners' interaction during oral performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47(3-4), pp. 367-395.
Gilabert, R. (2007). Effects of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 oral production. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), pp.215-240.
Haidet, P., Kubitz, K., & McCormack, W.T. (2014). Analysis of the team-based learning literature: TBL comes of age. Journal on excellence in college teaching, 25(3-4), pp. 303-333.
Harwood, N. (2010). English Language Teaching Materials. Cambridge: Cambridge University press
Holmqvist, K., Nyström, M., Andersson, R., Dewhurst, R., Jarodzka, H., & Van de Weijer, J. (2011). Eye tracking: A comprehensive guide to methods and measures. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Ishikawa, T. (Ed.) (2007). The effect of manipulating task complexity along the [+/-Here- and-Now] dimension on L2 written narrative discourse. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.
Jong, Y.O. (2009). An investigation into the benefits of collaborative writing for the development of EFL children’s communication skills: A reflective report of a teacher researcher (Doctoral dissertation, University of Warwick).
Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory: How many types of load does it really need? Educational Psychology Review, 23(1), pp.1-19.
Kormos, J. (2006). Speech production and second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007). The influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch L2. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45(3), pp. 241-259.
Lee, J. (2019). Time-on-task as a Measure of Cognitive Load in TBLT. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(3), pp. 958-969.
Levkina, M. (2008). The effects of increasing cognitive task complexity along [+/-planning Time] and [+/–few Elements] on L2 oral production. Unpublished Master dissertation. University of Barcelona
Levkina, M., & Gilabert, R. (2012). The effects of cognitive task complexity on L2 oral production. Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency investigating complexity, accuracy, and fluency in SLA, pp.171-198.
Liao, P.C. (2019). Understanding EFL Learner Agency in Collaborative Activities: A Case Study in a Taiwanese English Course. The Journal of Asia TEFL. 16(3), pp. 768-782.
Littlewood, W. (2004). The task-based approach: Some questions and suggestions. ELT journal, 58(4), pp. 319-326.
Mackey, A. (2007). Interaction as practice. In R. DeKeyser (ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. pp. 85–110. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Malicka, A., 2018. The role of task sequencing in fluency, accuracy, and complexity: Investigating the SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing. Language Teaching Research, p.1362168818813668.
Malicka, A., & Levkina, M. (2012). Measuring task complexity: Does EFL proficiency matter? Task-based language teaching in foreign language contexts: Research and implementation, pp. 43–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Mehnert, U. (1998). The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in second language acquisition, 20, pp.83-108.
Moattarian, A., Tahririan, M.H., & Alibabae, A. (2019). Task Complexity Manipulation and EFL learners’ interactions in the process of collaborative pre-planning. Applied Research on English Language, 8(1), pp.51-78.
Nation, I. S. P., & Newton, J. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL speaking and listening. New York: Routledge
Nation, I.S.P. (2011). Second language speaking. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp.445-454). New York: Routledge.
Ong, J., & Zhang, L.J. (2013). Effects of the manipulation of cognitive processes on EFL writers' text quality. TESOL quarterly, 47(2), pp.375-398.
Ozverir, I., Osam, U.V., & Herrington, J. (2017). Investigating the effects of authentic activities on foreign language learning: A design-based research approach. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(4), pp.261-274.
Park, H., & Lee, H. (2018). The effects of task complexity on Korean adult EFL learners’ summary writing. Modern English Education, 19(1), pp. 62-75.
Pica, T. (2013). From input, output and comprehension to negotiation, evidence, and attention. An overview of theory and research on learner interaction and SLA. In M. P. Garcia Mayo, M. J. Gutierrez Magado, & M. Martinez Adrian (ed.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition, (pp.49-79). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Prahbu, N. S. (1980). 'Reactions and predictions' [Special issue]. Bulletin 4(1). Bangalore: Regional Institute of English, South India
Révész, A. (2011). Task complexity, focus on L2 constructions, and individual differences: A classroom‐based study. The Modern Language Journal, 95, pp.162-181.
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), pp. 27-57
Robinson, P. (2003). The Cognition Hypothesis, task design and adult task-based language learning. Second Language Studies, 21(2), 45–107.
Robinson, P. (2007). Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), pp. 195-215
Robinson, P. (2011). Task-Based Language Learning: A Review of Issues. Language Learning, 61, 1-36.
Sasayama, S., & Izumi, S. (2012). Effects of task complexity and pre-task planning on Japanese EFL learners’ oral production. In Shehadeh, A., & Combe, C. A. (eds.), Task-based language teaching in foreign language contexts. Research and implementation, pp. 23–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Schmidt, R. (Ed.) (2012). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. . Boston: MA: Mouton de Gruyter.
Shajeri, E., & Izadpanah, S. (2016). The impact of task complexity along single task dimension on Iranian EFL learners' writing production. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(5), pp.935-945.
Shehadeh, A. (2005). Task-based language learning and teaching: Theories and applications. In Teachers exploring tasks in English language teaching (pp. 13-30). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Shehadeh, A., & Coombe, C.A. (eds) (2012). Task-based language teaching in foreign language contexts: Research and implementation, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied linguistics, 17(1), pp.38-62.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford. Oxford University Press.
Skehan, P. (2001). Tasks and language performance. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching, and testing, (pp. 167-185). London: Longman.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (Eds.). (2001). Cognition and tasks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some rules of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Van Avermaet, P., & Gysen, S. (2006). From needs to tasks: Language learning needs in a task-based approach. Task-based language education: From theory to practice, 17, pp.46-61.
Van Patten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input. Studies in Second Language Acquistition, 12(3), pp. 287-301.
Viriya, C. (2018). Using task-based learning with students of academic English. Arab World English Journal, 9(4), pp. 337-346.
Willis, J. (1996). A flexible framework for task-based learning. London: Longman.
Zhai, X., Dong, Y., Wang, S., Wang, L., & Yuan, J. (2019). Exploring eye-tracking analyses of EFL learners’ cognitive processing of reduced relative clause. Cluster Computing (3), pp.1-12.
