Skip to main content


  • Andrea Révész (a1) and Tineke Brunfaut (a1)

This study investigated the effects of a group of task factors on advanced English as a second language learners’ actual and perceived listening performance. We examined whether the speed, linguistic complexity, and explicitness of the listening text along with characteristics of the text necessary for task completion influenced comprehension. We also explored learners’ perceptions of what textual factors cause difficulty. The 68 participants performed 18 versions of a listening task, and each task was followed by a perception questionnaire. Nine additional students engaged in stimulated recall. The listening texts were analyzed in terms of a variety of measures, utilizing automatized analytical tools. We used Rasch and regression analyses to estimate task difficulty and its relationship to the text characteristics. Six measures emerged as significant predictors of task difficulty, including indicators of (a) lexical range, density, and diversity and (b) causal content. The stimulated recall comments were more reflective of these findings than the questionnaire responses.

Corresponding author
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Andrea Révész, Department of Linguistics and English Language, County South C70, Lancaster University, LA1 4YL, United Kingdom; e-mail:
Hide All
Allen G., & Hawkins S. (1980). Phonological rhythm: Definition and development. In Yeni-Komshian G. H., Kavanagh J. F., & Ferguson C. A. (Eds.), Child phonology: Volume 1. Production (pp. 227256). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Baddeley A. (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 829839.
Blau E. K. (1990). The effect of syntax, speed and pauses on listening comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 746753.
Bloomfield A., Wayland S. C., Rhoades E., Blodgett A., Linck J., & Ross S. (2011). What makes listening difficult? Factors affecting second language listening comprehension (Technical Report TTO 81434 E.3.1). College Park, MD: University of Maryland Center for Advanced Study of Language.
Boersma P., & Weenink D. (2008). Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.0.25) [computer software]. Retrieved 2011 from
Bradlow A. R., & Pisoni D. B. (1999). Recognition of spoken words by native and non-native listeners: Talker-, listener- and item-related factors. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 20742085.
Brindley G., & Slatyer H. (2002). Exploring task difficulty in ESL listening assessment. Language Testing, 19, 369394.
Buck G. (2001). Assessing listening. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Buck G., & Tatsuoka K. (1998). Application of the rule-space procedure to language testing: Examining attributes of a free response listening test. Language Testing, 15, 119157.
Carpenter P. A., & Just M. A. (1975). Sentence comprehension: A psycholinguistic processing model of verification. Psychological Review, 82, 4573.
Cervantes R., & Gainer G. (1992). The effects of syntactic simplification and repetition on listening comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 767774.
Cobb T. (n.d.). Web Vocabprofile. Retrieved from, an adaptation of Heatley & Nation’s (1994) Range.
Coltheart M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33, 497505.
Conklin K., & Schmitt N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29, 7289.
Coxhead A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 213238.
Cutler A., & Otake T. (1994). Mora or phoneme? Further evidence for language-specific listening. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 824844.
Derwing T., & Munro M. (2001). What speaking rates do non-native listeners prefer? Applied Linguistics, 22, 324337.
Ellis R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Foster P., Tonkyn A., & Wigglesworth G. (2000). Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21, 354375.
Freedle R., & Kostin I. (1999). Does the text matter in a multiple-choice test of comprehension? The case for the construct validity of TOEFL’s minitalks. Language Testing, 16, 232.
Garcia P. (2004). Pragmatic comprehension of high and low level language learners. TESL-EJ, 8(2). Retrieved from
Goh C. C. M. (2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners’ listening comprehension problems. System, 28, 5575.
Graesser A. C., McNamara D. S., & Louwerse M. M. (2003). What do readers need to learn in order to process coherence relations in narrative and expository text. In Sweet A. P. & Snow C. E. (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 8298). New York: Guilford.
Griffiths R. (1990). Speech rate and NNS comprehension: A preliminary study in time-benefit analysis. Language Learning, 40, 311336.
Griffiths R. (1992). Speech rate and listening comprehension: Further evidence of the relationship. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 385390.
Halliday M. A. K., & Hasan R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Henrichsen L. E. (1984). Sandhi-variation: A filter of input for learners of ESL. Language Learning, 34, 103126.
Hulstijn J. H. (2003). Connectionist models of language processing and the training of listening skills with the aid of multimedia software. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16, 413425.
Kostin I. (2004). Exploring item characteristics that are related to the difficulty of TOEFL dialogue items (TOEFL Research Report No. RR-79). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Linacre J. M. (2011). Facets computer program for many-facet Rasch measurement (Version 3.68.1) [computer software]. Beaverton, Oregon:
Louwerse M. M. (2002). An analytic and cognitive parameterization of coherence relations. Cognitive Linguistics, 21, 1535.
MacWhinney B. (2000). The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Malvern D. D., & Richards B. J. (1997). A new measure of lexical diversity. In Ryan A. & Wray A. (Eds.), Evolving models of language (pp. 5871). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Malvern D. D., Richards B. J., Chipere N., & Durán P. (2004). Lexical diversity and language development: Quantification and assessment. Houndmills, NH: Palgrave Macmillan.
Martinez R., & Schmitt N. (2012). A phrasal expressions list. Applied Linguistics, 33, 299320.
Mattys S. L., & Jusczyk P. W. (2001). Phonotactic cues for segmentation of fluent speech by infants. Cognition, 78, 91121.
McCarthy P. M., & Jarvis S. A. (2010). MTLD, vocd-D, and HD-D: A validation study of sophisticated approaches to lexical diversity assessment. Behaviour Research Methods, 42, 381392.
McNamara D. S., Louwerse M. M., Cai Z., & Graesser A. (2005). Coh-Metrix (Version 1.4) [computer software]. Retrieved fromhttp//
Muljani D., Koda K., & Moates D. R. (1998). The development of word recognition in a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 99113.
Nissan S., DeVincenzi F., & Tang K. L. (1996). An analysis of factors affecting the difficulty of dialogue items in TOEFL listening comprehension (TOEFL Research Report No. RR-51). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Norris J. M., & Ortega L. (2009). Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30, 555578.
Paivio A., Walsh M., & Bons T. (1994). Concreteness effects on memory: When and why? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 20, 11961204.
Pitt M. A., & McQueen J. M. (1998). Is compensation for coarticulation mediated by the lexicon? Journal of Memory & Language, 39, 347370.
Pollitt A., & Hutchinson C. (1987). Calibrating graded assessments: Rasch partial credit analysis of performance in writing. Language Testing, 4, 7292.
Rasch G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rosenhouse J., Haik L., & Kishon-Rabin L. (2006). Speech perception in adverse listening conditions in Arabic-Hebrew bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism, 10, 119135.
Rost M. (2005). L2 listening. In Hinkel E. (Ed.), Handbook of research on second language teaching and learning (pp. 503528). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rost M. (2011). Teaching and researching listening. London: Longman.
Rubin J. (1994). A review of second language listening comprehension research. Modern Language Journal, 78, 199221.
Rupp A. A., Garcia P., & Jamieson J. (2001). Combining multiple regression and CART to understand difficulty in second language reading and listening comprehension test items. International Journal of Testing, 1, 185216.
Samuda V., & Bygate M. (2008). Tasks in second language learning. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sanders T. J. M., Spooren W. P. M., & Noordman L. G. M. (1992). Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes, 15, 135.
Segalowitz N. (2003). Automaticity and second language learning. In C. & Long M. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 382408). Oxford: Blackwell.
Singh L., White K. S., & Morgan J. L. (2008). Building a phonological lexicon in the face of variable input: Effects of pitch and amplitude variation on early word recognition. Language Learning and Development, 4, 157178.
Sommers M. S., & Barcroft J. (2006). Stimulus variability and the phonetic relevance hypothesis: Effects of variability in speaking style, fundamental frequency, and speaking rate on spoken word identification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 24062416.
Taguchi N. (2005). Comprehending implied meaning as a foreign language. Modern Language Journal, 89, 543562.
Tettamanti M., Manenti R., Della Rosa P. A., Falini A., Perani D., Cappa S. F., & Moro A. (2008). Negation in the brain: Modulating action representations. Neuroimage, 43, 358367.
Vandergrift L. (2007). Recent developments in second and foreign language listening comprehension research. Language Teaching, 40, 191210.
Vandergrift L., & Goh C. (2009). Teaching and testing listening comprehension. In Doughty C. & Long M. (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 395411). Oxford: Blackwell.
Vitevitch M. S., & Luce P. A. (2004). A web-based interface to calculate phonotactic probability for words and nonwords in English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 481487.
West M. (1953). A general service list of English words. London: Longman.
Yanagawa K., & Green A. (2008). To show or not to show: The effects of item stems and answer options on performance on a multiple-choice listening comprehension test. System, 36, 107122.
Ying-hui H. (2006). An investigation into the task features affecting EFL listening comprehension test performance. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 8(2), 3354.
Zhao Y. (1997). The effects of listeners’ control of speech rate on second language comprehension. Applied Linguistics, 18, 4968.
Zwaan R. A., & Radvansky G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162185.
Recommend this journal

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

Studies in Second Language Acquisition
  • ISSN: 0272-2631
  • EISSN: 1470-1545
  • URL: /core/journals/studies-in-second-language-acquisition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 19
Total number of PDF views: 330 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 849 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 24th February 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.