By the same authors

From the same journal

Signatures of automaticity during practice: Explicit instruction about L1 processing routines can improve L2 grammatical processing.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Signatures of automaticity during practice : Explicit instruction about L1 processing routines can improve L2 grammatical processing. / McManus, Kevin; Marsden, Emma Josephine.

In: Applied Psycholinguistics, Vol. 40, No. 1, 17.01.2019, p. 205-234.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

McManus, K & Marsden, EJ 2019, 'Signatures of automaticity during practice: Explicit instruction about L1 processing routines can improve L2 grammatical processing.', Applied Psycholinguistics, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 205-234. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716418000553

APA

McManus, K., & Marsden, E. J. (2019). Signatures of automaticity during practice: Explicit instruction about L1 processing routines can improve L2 grammatical processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 40(1), 205-234. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716418000553

Vancouver

McManus K, Marsden EJ. Signatures of automaticity during practice: Explicit instruction about L1 processing routines can improve L2 grammatical processing. Applied Psycholinguistics. 2019 Jan 17;40(1):205-234. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716418000553

Author

McManus, Kevin ; Marsden, Emma Josephine. / Signatures of automaticity during practice : Explicit instruction about L1 processing routines can improve L2 grammatical processing. In: Applied Psycholinguistics. 2019 ; Vol. 40, No. 1. pp. 205-234.

Bibtex - Download

@article{f83fa21ab979454899e02cb4d9a1bb66,
title = "Signatures of automaticity during practice: Explicit instruction about L1 processing routines can improve L2 grammatical processing.",
abstract = "This study examined the extent to which explicit instruction about L1 and L2 processing routines improved the accuracy, speed, and automaticity of learners’ responses during sentence interpretation practice. Fifty-three English-speaking learners of L2 French were assigned to one of the following treatments: (1) a ‘core’ treatment consisting of L2 explicit information (EI) with L2 interpretation practice (L2-only group), (2) the same L2 core + L1 practice with L1 EI (L2+L1 group), or (3) the same L2 core + L1 practice but without L1 EI (L2+L1prac group). Findings indicated that increasing amounts of practice led to more accurate and faster performance only for learners who received L1 EI (L2+L1 group). Coefficient of Variation analyses (Segalowitz & Segalowitz, 1993) indicated knowledge restructuring early on that appeared to lead to gradual automatization over time (Solovyeva and DeKeyser, 2017; Suzuki, 2017). Our findings that EI and practice about L1 processing routines benefited the accuracy, speed, and automaticity of L2 performance have major implications for theories of L2 learning, the role of L1 EI in L2 grammar learning, and L2 pedagogy.  ",
author = "Kevin McManus and Marsden, {Emma Josephine}",
note = "This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "17",
doi = "10.1017/S0142716418000553",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "205--234",
journal = "Applied Psycholinguistics",
issn = "1469-1817",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "1",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) - Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Signatures of automaticity during practice

T2 - Applied Psycholinguistics

AU - McManus, Kevin

AU - Marsden, Emma Josephine

N1 - This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details

PY - 2019/1/17

Y1 - 2019/1/17

N2 - This study examined the extent to which explicit instruction about L1 and L2 processing routines improved the accuracy, speed, and automaticity of learners’ responses during sentence interpretation practice. Fifty-three English-speaking learners of L2 French were assigned to one of the following treatments: (1) a ‘core’ treatment consisting of L2 explicit information (EI) with L2 interpretation practice (L2-only group), (2) the same L2 core + L1 practice with L1 EI (L2+L1 group), or (3) the same L2 core + L1 practice but without L1 EI (L2+L1prac group). Findings indicated that increasing amounts of practice led to more accurate and faster performance only for learners who received L1 EI (L2+L1 group). Coefficient of Variation analyses (Segalowitz & Segalowitz, 1993) indicated knowledge restructuring early on that appeared to lead to gradual automatization over time (Solovyeva and DeKeyser, 2017; Suzuki, 2017). Our findings that EI and practice about L1 processing routines benefited the accuracy, speed, and automaticity of L2 performance have major implications for theories of L2 learning, the role of L1 EI in L2 grammar learning, and L2 pedagogy.  

AB - This study examined the extent to which explicit instruction about L1 and L2 processing routines improved the accuracy, speed, and automaticity of learners’ responses during sentence interpretation practice. Fifty-three English-speaking learners of L2 French were assigned to one of the following treatments: (1) a ‘core’ treatment consisting of L2 explicit information (EI) with L2 interpretation practice (L2-only group), (2) the same L2 core + L1 practice with L1 EI (L2+L1 group), or (3) the same L2 core + L1 practice but without L1 EI (L2+L1prac group). Findings indicated that increasing amounts of practice led to more accurate and faster performance only for learners who received L1 EI (L2+L1 group). Coefficient of Variation analyses (Segalowitz & Segalowitz, 1993) indicated knowledge restructuring early on that appeared to lead to gradual automatization over time (Solovyeva and DeKeyser, 2017; Suzuki, 2017). Our findings that EI and practice about L1 processing routines benefited the accuracy, speed, and automaticity of L2 performance have major implications for theories of L2 learning, the role of L1 EI in L2 grammar learning, and L2 pedagogy.  

U2 - 10.1017/S0142716418000553

DO - 10.1017/S0142716418000553

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 205

EP - 234

JO - Applied Psycholinguistics

JF - Applied Psycholinguistics

SN - 1469-1817

IS - 1

ER -