Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-9lb97 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-23T16:45:37.292Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

TRANSFER-OF-TRAINING EFFECTS IN PROCESSING INSTRUCTION

The Role of Form-Related Explicit Information

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2013

Justin P. White  and
Andrew J. DeMil
Justin P. White*
Affiliation:
Florida Atlantic University
Andrew J. DeMil
Affiliation:
University of Tampa
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Justin P. White, Department of Languages, Linguistics, and Comparative Literature, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL 33431. E-mail: jwhite94@fau.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study compares the effects of processing instruction (PI), structured input (SI), and form-related explicit information (FREI) on a primary target form (i.e., third-person Spanish accusative clitics) and on a secondary form (i.e., third-person Spanish dative clitics). Participants included 151 adult learners enrolled in a beginning-level Spanish course. Findings revealed that SI is as effective on the primary target form as PI immediately after treatment; however, the FREI component of PI may play a positive role at the delayed posttest, as exhibited by the fact that the PI group maintained gains, whereas the SI group, although improved from the pretest, did not. Learners exposed to both PI and SI also demonstrated gains on the secondary target form, which suggests a transfer-of-training effect for both interventions. As such, we discuss the theoretical and methodological ramifications of these findings.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , September 2013 , pp. 519 - 544
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Benati, A. (2004). The effects of structured input activities and explicit information on the acquisition of Italian future tense. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 211–230). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Benati, A., & Lee, J. F. (2008). Grammar acquisition and processing instruction: Secondary and cumulative effects. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313–348). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Farley, A. P. (2004). Processing instruction and the Spanish subjunctive: Is explicit information needed? In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 231–244). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Fernández, C. (2008). Reexamining the role of explicit information in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 277–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, N., Culman, H., & VanPatten, B. (2009). More on the effects of explicit information in instructed SLA: A partial replication and response to Fernández (2008). Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 559–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (2005). Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second-language learning: Introduction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 129–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. F. (2004). On the generalizability, limits, and potential future directions of processing instruction research. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary (pp. 315–328). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Leeser, M. J., & DeMil, A. (in press). Investigating the secondary effects of processing instruction in Spanish: From instruction on accusative clitics to transfer-of-training effects on dative clitics. Hispania.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. (2000). Causative psych verbs in Spanish L2 acquisition. In Leow, R. P. & Sanz, C. (Eds.), Spanish applied linguistics at the turn of the millennium: Papers from the 1999 conference on the L1 and L2 acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese (pp. 97–118). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer-assisted study. Language Learning, 53, 35–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, B. (1989). An empirical study of explicit and implicit teaching strategies in French. Modern Language Journal, 73, 14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2002). Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning, 52, 755–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2004). Several reflections on why there is good reason to continue researching the effects of processing instruction. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 329–340). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2007a). Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 115–135). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2007b). Some thoughts on the future of research on input enhancement. In Gascoigne, C. (Ed.), Assessing the impact of input enhancement in second language education: Evolution, theory, and practice (pp. 169–189). Stillwater, OK: New Forums.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., Borst, S., Collopy, E., Qualin, A., & Price, J. (in press). Explicit instruction, grammatical sensitivity, and the first-noun principle: A cross-linguistic study in processing instruction. Modern Language Journal.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Input processing and second language acquisition: A role for instruction. Modern Language Journal, 77, 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B., Farmer, J. L., & Clardy, C. C. (2009). Processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction: A response to Keating and Farley (2008). Hispania, 92, 116–126.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., Inclezan, D., Salazar, H., & Farley, A. P. (2009). Processing instruction and dictogloss: A study on object pronouns and word order in Spanish. Foreign Language Annals, 42, 557–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B., Leeser, M. J., & Keating, G. D. (2009). Sol y viento: Beginning Spanish. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Oikkenon, S. (1996). Explanation versus structured input in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 495–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Sanz, C. (1995). From input to output: Processing instruction and communicative tasks. In Eckman, F. R., Highland, D., Lee, P. W., Milham, J., & Weber, R. R. (Eds.), Second language acquisition theory and pedagogy (pp. 169–185). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
White, J. P. (in press). The effect of input-based instruction type on the acquisition of Spanish accusative clitics. Hispania.Google Scholar
Wong, W. (2004). The nature of processing instruction. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 33–63). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar