Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

The effect of dual task demands and proficiency on second language speech production*


In this study we examined how the introduction of a parallel finger-tapping task influences second language (L2) speech encoding mechanisms and monitoring processes, and how the level of proficiency impacts the efficiency and accuracy of L2 performance under single and dual task conditions. The results indicate that imposing dual task demands had a negative effect on the accuracy of lexical selection and the efficiency of error-correction processes. We argue that this can be explained with reference to attentional bottleneck effects on lexical selection processes and on monitoring. The findings also reveal that the level of L2 competence influenced both the speed and the accuracy of speech encoding processes and the efficiency of monitoring.

Corresponding author
Address for correspondence: Judit Kormos, Lancaster University, Department of Linguistics and English Language, Bailrigg, County South LA1 5FB,
Hide All

The first author was supported by a grant funded by the Hungarian Scholarship Board (MOB-193-1/2009. We thank the three anonymous reviewers of this paper for their detailed comments and useful suggestions.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

A. D. Baddeley (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 417423.

A. D. Baddeley (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 829839.

A. D. Baddeley , H. Emslie , J. Kolodny , & J. Duncan (1998). Random generation and the executive control of working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51 (A), 819852.

E. R. Blackmer , & J. L. Mitton (1991). Theories of monitoring and the timing of repairs in spontaneous speech. Cognition, 39, 173194.

D. E. Broadbent (1958). Perception and communication. London: Pergamon.

J. Cohen (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd edn.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

K de Bot . (1996). The psycholinguistics of the output hypothesis. Language Learning, 46, 529555.

G. S. Dell (1986). A spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93, 283321.

R. Ellis (2005). Planning and task-performance in a second language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

F. J. Evans (1978). Monitoring attention deployment by random number generation: Index to measure subjective randomness. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 12 (1), 3538.

S. E. Gathercole (1999). Cognitive approaches to the development of short-term memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 410419.

R. Gilabert (2007). Effects of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 oral production. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45, 215240.

R. J. Hartsuiker , & P. N. Barkhuysen (2006). Language production and working memory: The case of subject–verb agreement. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 181204.

R. J. Hartsuiker , & H. H. J. Kolk (2001). Error monitoring in speech production: A computational test of the Perceptual Loop Theory. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 113157.

W. S. Horton , & B. Keysar (1996). When do speakers take into account common ground? Cognition, 59, 91117.

S. Izumi (2003). Comprehension and production processes in second language learning: In search of the psycholinguistic rationale for the output hypothesis. Applied Linguistics, 24, 168196.

M. Jahanshahi , T. T. Saleem , A. K. Ho , G. Dirnberger , & R. R. Fuller (2006). Random number generation as an index of controlled processing. Neuropsychology, 20, 391399.

M. J. Kane , & R. W. Engle (2003). Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 132, 4770.

J. Kormos (2000). The role of attention in monitoring second language speech production. Language Learning, 50, 343384.

J. Kormos (2011). Speech production and the Cognition Hypothesis. In P. Robinson (ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance, pp. 3960. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

J. Kormos , & M. Dénes (2004). Exploring measures and perceptions of fluency in the speech of second language learners. System, 32, 146164.

P. Lennon (1991). Error: Some problems of definition, identification and distinction. Applied Linguistics, 12, 180195.

W. J. M. Levelt , A. Roelofs , & A. S. Meyer (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Science, 22, 138.

N. Martin , R. W. Weisberg , & E. M. Saffran (1989). Variables influencing the occurrence of naming errors: Implications for models of lexical retrieval. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 462485.

D. Navon (1984). Resources – A theoretical soup stone? Psychological Review, 91, 216234.

D. Navon (1989). The importance of being visible: On the role of attention in a mind viewed as an anarchic intelligence system; basic tenets. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 1, 191213.

J. M. Norris , & L. Ortega (2009). Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30, 555578.

C. C. E. Oomen , & A. Postma (2001). Effects of time pressure on mechanisms of speech production and self-monitoring. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 163184.

C. C. E. Oomen , & A. Postma (2002). Limitations in processing resources and speech monitoring. Language and Cognitive Processes, 17, 163184.

L. Ortega (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 109148.

A. Postma (2000). Detection of errors during speech production: A review of speech monitoring models. Cognition, 77, 97131.

A. Postma , & H. Kolk (1992). The effects of noise masking and required accuracy on speech errors disfluencies and self-repairs. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35, 537544.

A. Postma , & H. Kolk (1993). The covert repair hypothesis: Prearticulatory repair processes in normal and stuttered disfluencies. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 472487.

N. Poulisse , & T. Bongaerts (1994). First language use in second language production. Applied Linguistics, 15, 3657.

P. Robinson (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 2757.

P. Robinson (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 132.

P. Robinson (2007). Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on L2 speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45, 237257.

K. Sarno , & C. D. Wickens (1995). The role of multiple resources in predicting time-sharing efficiency: An evaluation of three workload models in a multiple task setting. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 5, 107130.

P. Shah , & A. Miyake (1996). The separability of working memory resources for spatial thinking and language processing: An individual differences approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 427.

P. Skehan (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30, 510532.

J. N. Towse , & D. Neil (1998). Analyzing human random generation behavior: A review of methods used and a computer program for describing performance. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 30, 583591.

C. D. Wickens (2007). Attention to the second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 177191.

F. Yuan , & R. Ellis (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24, 127.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
  • ISSN: 1366-7289
  • EISSN: 1469-1841
  • URL: /core/journals/bilingualism-language-and-cognition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *