Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-zlvph Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-20T14:39:01.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

APTITUDE AND SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2005

Peter Robinson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent second language acquisition (SLA) research into the cognitive abilities implicated in implicit, incidental, and explicit learning, and in learning and performance on tasks differing in their information processing demands has prompted new theoretical frameworks for conceptualizing L2 aptitude. This research is reviewed and related to measures of abilities operationalized in existing aptitude tests, as well as to measures of abilities that are the focus of more recent research in cognitive psychology. Finally, prospects for developing aptitude tests to serve the purposes of predicting both early and advanced level language learning success are discussed in the light of the SLA findings and aptitude frameworks reviewed.

Information

Type
FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES IN LANGUAGE LEARNING
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 25 , March 2005 , pp. 46 - 73
Copyright
© 2005 Cambridge University Press

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

Ackerman P. L. 1999. Traits and knowledge as determinants of learning and individual differences: Putting it all together. In P. L. Ackerman, P. Kyllonen, & R. Roberts (Eds.), Learning and individual differences: Process, trait and content determinants (pp. 437– 462). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Ackerman P. L. 2003. Aptitude complexes and trait complexes. Educational Psychologist, 38, 85– 93.Google Scholar
Ackerman P. L. & Ciancolo A. 2002. Ability and task constraint determinants of complex task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 194– 208.Google Scholar
Anderson M. 1992. Intelligence and development: A cognitive theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
Archer D. 1983. The encoding of meaning: A test of three theories of social interaction. Sociological Enquiry, 50, 393– 419Google Scholar
Arrington C. A., & Logan G. D. 2004. The costs of a voluntary task switch. Psychological Science, 15 9 610– 616.Google Scholar
Ayala C. C., Shavelson R. J., Yin Y., & Schultz S. E. 2002. Reasoning dimensions underlying science achievement: The case of performance assessment. Educational Assessment, 8, 101– 122.Google Scholar
Baars B. 1986. The cognitive revolution in psychology. New York: Guilford.
Baddeley A. 2000. Working memory and language processing. In B.E. Dimitrova & K. Hyltenstam (Eds.), Language processing and simultaneous interpreting (pp. 1– 16). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Bandura A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bardovi-Harlig K. 2001. Evaluating the empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction? In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 13– 32). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Baron-Cohen S. 1995. Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Benati A. 2004. The effects of structured input activities and explicit information on the acquisition of the Italian future tense. In B. Van Patten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research and commentary (pp. 207– 226). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bygate M. 2001. Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23– 48). Harlow: Longman.
Carroll J. B. 1981. Twenty-five years of research on foreign language aptitude. In K. C. Diller (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude (pp. 83– 118). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Carroll J. B. 1990. Cognitive abilities in foreign language aptitude: Then and now. In T. Parry & C. Stansfield (Eds.), Language aptitude reconsidered (pp. 11– 29). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Carroll J. B. 1993. Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Carroll J. B., & Sapon S. M. 1959. The Modern Language Aptitude Test. Washington, DC: Second Language Testing Incorporated.
Ceci S. J. 1996. On intelligence… more or less: A bio-ecological treatise on intellectual development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Chapin F. S. 1967. The social insight test. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Chee M. W., Hon N., Lee H. L., & Soon C. S. 2001. Relative language proficiency modulates BOLD signal change when bilinguals perform semantic judgements. Neuroimage, 13, 1155– 1163.Google Scholar
Chee M. W., Soon C. S., Lee H. L. & Pallier C. 2004. Left insula activation: A marker for language attainment in bilinguals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101 2 15265– 15276.Google Scholar
Clark A. 1997. Being there: Putting brain, body and world together again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cohen A. D. 2003. The learner's side of foreign language learning: Where do styles, strategies and tasks meet? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 41, 279– 292.Google Scholar
Collentine J., & Freed B. F. (Ed.). 2004. Language context and its effects on second language acquisition [Special issue]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 2.
Costa P. T., & McCrae R. R. 1985. The NEO Personality Inventory manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc..
Dai D. Y., & Sternberg R. J. (Ed.). 2004. Motivation, emotion, and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Daneman M., & Carpenter P. A. 1980. Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 19, 450– 466.Google Scholar
de Graaff R. 1997. Differential effects of explicit instruction on second language acquisition. The Hague: Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics.
de Jong N. (in press). Is listening enough for grammar acquisition? The effect of an aural training on reception and production in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 2.
Deary I. J. 2000. Looking down on human intelligence: From psychometrics to the brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DeKeyser R. M. 1995. Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 379– 410.Google Scholar
DeKeyser R. M. 1997. Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language syntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 195– 221.Google Scholar
DeKeyser R. M. 2003. Implicit and explicit learning. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313– 348). Oxford: Blackwell.
DeKeyser R. M. (Ed.) (in press). Practice in second language learning: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Diller K. C. (Ed.) 1981. Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Dörnyei Z. 2002. The motivational basis of language learning tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 137– 158). Amsterdam: Benjamins
Dörnyei Z. (in press). Individual differences and second language learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dörnyei Z., & Skehan P. 2003. Individual differences in second language learning. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 589– 630). Oxford: Blackwell.
Doughty C. 2001. Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206– 257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Doughty C. 2004. When PI is focus on form it is very, very good; but when it is focus on forms …. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research and commentary (pp. 121– 132). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Doughty C. & Varela E. 1998. Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114– 138). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Doughty C., & Williams J. 1998. Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197– 262). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ehrman M. E. 1996. Understanding second language learning difficulties. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ehrman M. E. 1998. A study of the Modern Language Aptitude Test for predicting learning success and advising students. Applied Language Learning, 9, 31– 70.Google Scholar
Ehrman M. E., Leaver B., & Oxford R. 2003. A brief overview of individual differences in second language learning. System, 31, 313– 330.Google Scholar
Ellis N. C. 1993. Rules and instances in foreign language learning: Interactions of explicit and implicit knowledge. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 5, 289– 318.Google Scholar
Ellis N. C. 2001. Memory for language. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 34– 68). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis N. C. 2003. Constructions, chunking and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 63– 103). Oxford: Blackwell.
Ellis N. C. (in press). At the interface: How explicit knowledge affects implicit language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27 (2).
Ellis R. (Ed.). 1999. Learning a second language through interaction. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Ellis R. 2004. Task-based teaching and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis R. (Ed.) (in press). Planning time and second language learning. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Farley A. 2004. Processing instruction and the Spanish subjunctive: Is explicit information needed? In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research and commentary (pp. 227– 240). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fleishman E. A. 1978. Relating individual differences to the dimensions of human tasks. Ergonomics, 21, 1007– 1019.
Fleishman E. A., & Quaintance M. K. 1984. Taxonomies of human performance: The description of human tasks. New York: Academic Press.
Foster P., & Skehan P. 1996. The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299– 324.Google Scholar
Garlick D. 2002. Understanding the nature of the general factor of intelligence: The role of individual differences in neural plasticity as an explanatory mechanism. Psychological Review, 109, 116– 136.Google Scholar
Gilabert R. 2004. Task complexity, planning and L2 oral narrative production. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. Department of Applied Linguistics, University of Barcelona, Spain
Goffman E. 1967. Interaction ritual: Essays in face-to-face behavior. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Goldin-Meadow S., Alibali M. W., & Church C. 1993. Transitions in concept acquisition: Using the hand to read the mind. Psychological Review, 100, 279– 297.Google Scholar
Grigorenko E. L. 2002. Language-based learning disabilities. In P. Robinson Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 95– 113). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Hardy I., & Moore J. 2004. Foreign language student's conversational negotiations in different task environments. Applied Linguistics, 25, 340– 370.Google Scholar
Harley B., & Hart D. 1997. Language aptitude and second language proficiency in classroom learners of different starting ages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 379– 400.Google Scholar
Harley B., & Hart D. 2002. Age, aptitude and second language learning on a bilingual exchange. In P. Robinson Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 301– 330). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Hulstijn J. H. 2001. Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In P. Robinson Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258– 286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hulstijn J. H. 2003. Incidental and intentional learning. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 349– 381). Oxford: Blackwell.
Hulstijn J. H., & DeKeyser R. M. 1997. Second language acquisition research in the laboratory: Special Issue. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 2
Hulstijn J. H., & Ellis R. (Ed.) 2005. Implicit and explicit second language learning: Special issue. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 2.
Iwashita N., McNamara T., & Elder C. 2001. Can we predict task difficulty in an oral proficiency test? Exploring the potential of an information processing approach to task design. Language Learning, 51, 401– 436.Google Scholar
Kasper G., & Rose K. 2002. Pragmatic development in a second language. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Kenyon D. M., & MacGregor D. (Eds.). 2004. Final report of the Defense Language Aptitude Battery II project. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Krashen S. D. 1982. Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
Kim J. 1993. Supervenience and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kyllonen P. C., & Lajoie S. 2003. Reassessing aptitude: Introduction to a special issue in honor of Richard E. Snow. Educational Psychologist, 38, 79– 83.Google Scholar
Langdon R., Coltheart M., Ward P., & Catts S. 2002. Disturbed communication in schizophrenia: The role of pragmatics and poor theory-of-mind. Psychological Medicine, 32, 1273– 1284.Google Scholar
Leeman J. 2003. Recasts and second language development: Beyond negative evidence. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 37– 64.Google Scholar
Leeman J., Artegoitia I., Fridman B., & Doughty C. 1995. Integrating attention to form with meaning: Focus on form in content-based Spanish instruction. In R. Schmidt Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 217– 258). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i Press.
Levinson S. C. 1995. Interactional biases in human thinking. In E. Goody Social intelligence and interaction (pp. 221– 260). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Liddicoat A., & Crozet C. 2001. Acquiring French interactional norms through instruction. In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp.125– 144). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Logan G. D. 2004. Working memory, task switching and executive control in the task span procedure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 218– 236.Google Scholar
Lohman D. F. 2000. Complex information processing and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg Handbook of intelligence (pp. 285– 340). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Long M. H. (in press). Recasts: The story so far. Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lyster R. 2004. Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399– 432.Google Scholar
Mayer J. D., Salovey P., & Caruso D. 2000. Models of emotional intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 396– 420). New York: Cambridge University Press.
McLaughlin B. 1995. Aptitude from an information-processing perspective. Language Testing, 12, 370– 387.Google Scholar
Miyake A., & Friedman N. 1998. Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working Memory as language aptitude. In A. Healy & L. Bourne Jr. (Eds.), Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention (pp. 339– 364). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Nagata H., Aline D., & Ellis R. 1999. Modified input, language aptitude, and the acquisition of word meanings. In R. Ellis (Ed.) Learning a second language through interaction (pp. 133– 150). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Nelson K. 1987. Some observations from the perspective of the rare event, cognitive comparison theory of language acquisition. In K. Nelson & A. vanKleek (Eds.), Childrens' language (pp. 289– 331). Norwood, NJ: Erlbaum.
Niwa Y. 2000. Reasoning demands of L2 tasks and L2 narrative production: Effects of individual differences in working memory, intelligence and aptitude. Unpublished master's dissertation, Department of English, Aoyama Gakuin University, Japan
O' Grady W. 2004. Syntactic carpentry. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ortega L. 1999. Planning and focus on form in L2 oral discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 103– 135.Google Scholar
Oxford R., Cho Y., Leung S., & Kim H. 2004. Effect of the presence and difficulty of task on strategy use. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 42, 1– 48.Google Scholar
Parry T., & Child J. 1990. Preliminary investigation of the relationship between VORD, MLAT and language proficiency. In T. Parry & C. Stansfield (Eds.), Language aptitude reconsidered (pp. 30– 66). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Parry T., & Stansfield C. 1990. (Eds.) Language aptitude reconsidered. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Pashler H. E. 2000. Task switching and multitask performance. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 277– 308). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pellegrino J., & Glaser R. 1979. Cognitive correlates and components in the analysis of individual differences. In R. J. Sternberg & D. Detterman (Eds.), Human intelligence: perspectives on its theory and measurement (pp. 61– 88). Noorwood, NJ: Ablex.
Peterson C. R., & Al Haik A. R. 1976. The development of the Defense Language Aptitude Battery (DLAB). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 6, 369– 380.Google Scholar
Philp J. 2003. Constraints on “Noticing the Gap:” Nonnative speakers' noticing of recasts in NS-NNS interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 99– 126.Google Scholar
Pimsleur P. 1966. Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery (PLAB). Washington, DC: Second Language Testing Incorporated.
Plomin R. 2002. Individual differences research in the postgenomic era. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 909– 930.Google Scholar
Rahimpour M. 1997. Task complexity and variation in oral L2 narrative discourse. Unpublished Ph.D. disseration, CLTR, University of Queensland Australia.
Rahimpour M. 1999. Task complexity and variation in interlanguage. In N. O. Jungheim & P. Robinson (Eds.), Pragmatics and pedagogy: Proceedings of the Third Pacific Second Language Research Forum, Vol. 2 (pp. 115– 134). Tokyo: PacSLRF.
Ranta L. 2002. The role of learners' analytic abilities in the communicative classroom. In P. Robinson (Ed.) Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 159– 180). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Reed D., & Stansfield C. 2004. An interview with John B. Carroll: The story behind the Modern Language Aptitude Test. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1, 21– 38.Google Scholar
Robinson P. 1995a. Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45, 99– 140.Google Scholar
Robinson P. 1995b. Attention, memory and the ‘noticing’ hypothesis. Language Learning, 45, 283– 331.Google Scholar
Robinson P. 1996a. Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 27– 67.Google Scholar
Robinson P. 1996b. Consciousness, rules and instructed second language acquisition. New York: Lang.
Robinson P. 1997a. Individual differences and the fundamental similarity of implicit and explicit adult second language learning. Language Learning, 47, 45– 99.Google Scholar
Robinson P. 1997b. Automaticity and generalizability of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced and rule-search conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 223– 247.Google Scholar
Robinson P. 1999. Second language classroom research in Japan: Issues, studies, and prospects. In T. Fujimura, Y. Kato & R. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th IUJ Conference on second language research (pp. 93– 116). Tokyo: International University of Japan.
Robinson P. 2001a. Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 27– 57.Google Scholar
Robinson P. 2001b. Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for investigating task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287– 318). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson P. 2001c. Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes, and learning conditions in SLA. Second Language Research, 17, 368– 392.Google Scholar
Robinson P. 2001. (Ed.). Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson P. 2002a. (Ed.). Individual differences and instructed language learning. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Robinson P. 2002b. Learning conditions, aptitude complexes and SLA: A framework for research and pedagogy. In P. Robinson Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 113– 133). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Robinson P. 2002c. Individual differences in intelligence, aptitude and working memory during adult incidental second language learning: A replication and extension of Reber, Walkenfeld, and Hernstadt (1991). In P. Robinson (Ed.) Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 211– 266). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Robinson P. 2003a. Attention and memory during SLA. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 631– 678). Oxford: Blackwell.
Robinson P. 2003b. The Cognition Hypothesis, task design and adult task-based language learning. Second Language Studies, 21 (2), 45– 107.Google Scholar
Robinson P. (in press a). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: A review of studies in a Componential Framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 43 (1). .
Robinson P. (in press b). Cognitive abilities, chunk-strength and frequency effects in implicit Artificial Grammar and incidental L2 learning: Replications of Reber, Walkenfeld, and Hernstadt (1991) and Knowlton and Squire (1996) and their relevance for SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27 (2).
Robinson P. (in press c). Aptitude, abilities, contexts and practice. In R. M. DeKeyser (Ed.) Practice in second language learning: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson P., & Ha M. 1993. Instance theory and second language rule learning under explicit conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 413– 438.Google Scholar
Robinson P., Ting S.C-C., & Urwin J. 1995. Investigating second language task complexity. RELC Journal, 26, 62– 79.Google Scholar
Robinson P., & Yamaguchi Y. 1999. Aptitude, task feedback and generalizability of focus on form: A classroom study. Paper presented at the 12th AILA World Congress, Waseda University, Tokyo, August.
Rose K., & Kasper G. 2001. Pragmatics in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rosenthal R., Rosnow R., & Rubin D. 2000. Contrasts and effect sizes in behavioral research: A correlational approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rosenthall R., Hall J., Rogers P. L., & Archer D. 1979. Sensitivity to nonverbal communications: The PONS test. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Sackett P., Schmitt N., Ellingson J., & Kabin M. 2001. High-stakes testing in employment, credentialing, and higher education: Prospects in a post-affirmative action world. American Psychologist, 56, 302– 318.Google Scholar
Sands W., Waters B., & McBride J. 1997. (Eds.) Computerized adaptive testing: From inquiry to operation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Corporation.
Sasaki M. 1996. Second language proficiency, foreign language aptitude, and intelligence. New York: Lang.
Sawyer M., & Ranta L. 2001. Aptitude, individual differences and instructional design. In P. Robinson Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 319– 353). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schumann J. H., Crowell S., Jones N., Lee N., Schuchert C., & Woods L. 2004. The neurobiology of learning: Perspectives from second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schmidt R. 2001. Attention. In P. Robinson Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 1– 32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schmidt R., & Frota S. 1986. Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In R. Day Talking to learn: Conversation in second language learning (pp. 237– 322). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Segalowitz N. 2003. Automaticity and second language acquisition. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 382– 408). Oxford: Blackwell.
Segalowitz N., & Freed B. F. 2004. Context, contact, and cognition in oral fluency acquisition: Learning Spanish in at home and study abroad contexts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 201– 226.Google Scholar
Shavelson R. J., & Roeser R. W. 2002. (Eds.) A multidimensional approach to achievement validation [Special Issue]. Educational Assessment, 8, 2.Google Scholar
Skehan P. 1989. Individual differences in second language learning. London: Arnold.
Skehan P. 1998. A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skehan P. 1999. Task-based language instruction. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 268– 286.Google Scholar
Smith D. L., Nobe S., Robinson P., Strong G., Tani M., & Yoshiba H. 2004. Language and comprehension: Perspectives from linguistics and language education. Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishing.
Snow R. E. 1987. Aptitude complexes. In R. E. Snow & M. J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction, Vol. 3: Conative and affective process analysis (pp. 11– 34). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Snow R. E. 1994. Abilities in academic tasks. In R. J. Sternberg & R. K. Wagner (Eds.), Mind in context: Interactionist perspectives on human intelligence (pp. 3– 37). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Snow R. E., Kyllonen P. C., & Marshalek B. 1984. The topography of ability and learning correlations. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.) Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp. 47– 103). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sparks R., & Ganschow L. 2001. Aptitude for learning a foreign language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 21, 90– 111.Google Scholar
Spolsky B. 1995. Prognostication and language aptitude testing, 1925–62. Language Testing, 12, 321– 340.Google Scholar
Stanovitch K., & West R. 2000. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645– 665.Google Scholar
Sternberg R. J. 1977. Intelligence, information processing and analogical reasoning: The componential analysis of human abilities. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sternberg R. J. 2002. The theory of successful intelligence and its implications for language aptitude testing. In P. Robinson Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 13– 44). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Sternberg R. J. 2004. Comments on the ‘Summary of the DLAB 2 project.’ In D. M. Kenyon, & D. MacGregor (Eds.), Final report of the Defense Language Aptitude Battery II project, (Appendix I, pp.1– 14). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Sternberg R. J., & Grigorenko E. L. 2003. (Eds.) The psychology of abilities, competencies and expertise. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg R. J., & Wagner R. K. (Eds.) 1994. Mind in context: Interactionist perspectives on human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tokowitcz N., & MacWhinney B. (in press). Implicit and explicit measures of sensitivity to violations in second language grammar: An event-related potential investigation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 2.
VanPatten B. 2004. (Ed.) Processing instruction: Theory, research and commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
VanPatten B. & Cadierno T. 1993. Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 225– 243.Google Scholar
White J. 1998. Getting the learners' attention: A typographical input enhancement study. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 85– 113). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams J. N. 1999. Memory, attention, and inductive learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 1– 48.Google Scholar
Yoshimi D. 2001. Explicit instruction and JFL learners' use of interactional discourse markers. In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 223– 247). New York: Cambridge University Press.