Home The effect of written text on comprehension of spoken English as a foreign language: A replication study
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

The effect of written text on comprehension of spoken English as a foreign language: A replication study

  • Xuan Wang EMAIL logo and Elsa Tragant
Published/Copyright: October 30, 2019

Abstract

The use of written text has been acclaimed to enhance L2 listening comprehension, yet some argue that using written text does not effectively prepare learners to listen in real situations. Thus, the study was conducted to explore the effect of written text on learners’ perceived difficulty, listening comprehension and learning to listen through replicating the research by Diao, Chandler & Sweller (2007. The effect of written text on comprehension of spoken English as a foreign language. The American Journal of Psychology 237–261). Participants were 101 low-proficient English learners who were divided into three groups: listening with subtitles, listening with a full script and listening only. Each group first listened to a passage in their respective mode, then all three groups listened to another passage in the listening-only mode. Participants rated their perceived difficulty and completed a free recall task after each listening. Results suggest that the difficulty of written text should be tuned with learners’ proficiency level so that they can benefit from the presence of written text in listening.

References

Abbuhl, R. 2011. Why, when, and how to replicate research. Research Methods in Second Language Acquisition: A Practical Guide 13. 296.10.1002/9781444347340.ch15Search in Google Scholar

Baddeley, A. 1998. Recent developments in working memory. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 8(2). 234–238.10.1016/S0959-4388(98)80145-1Search in Google Scholar

Bandura, A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, US: Prentice-Hall, Inc.Search in Google Scholar

Bird, S. A. & J. N. Williams. 2002. The effect of bimodal input on implicit and explicit memory: An investigation into the benefits of within-language subtitling. Applied Psycholinguistics 23(4). 509–533.10.1017/S0142716402004022Search in Google Scholar

Brown, D & H. Lee. 2015. Teaching by principles. An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New York: Pearson.Search in Google Scholar

Chandler, P. & J. Sweller. 1991. Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction 8(4). 293–332.10.1207/s1532690xci0804_2Search in Google Scholar

Chandler, P. & J. Sweller. 1996. Cognitive load while learning to use a computer program. Applied Cognitive Psychology 10(2). 151–170.10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199604)10:2<151::AID-ACP380>3.0.CO;2-USearch in Google Scholar

Chang, A. C. S. 2009. Gains to L2 listeners from reading while listening vs. listening only in comprehending short stories. System 37(4). 652–663.10.1016/j.system.2009.09.009Search in Google Scholar

Chang, A. C. S. 2016. Teaching L2 listening: In and outside the classroom. In W. A. Renandya & H. P. Widodo (eds.), English language teaching today. Linking theory and practice, 111–126. Switzerland: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-38834-2_9Search in Google Scholar

Chang, A. C. S. & S. Millett. 2014. The effect of extensive listening on developing L2 listening fuency: Some hard evidence. ELT Journal 68(1). 31–40.10.1093/elt/cct052Search in Google Scholar

Charles, T. J. & D. Trenkic. 2015. Speech segmentation in a second language: The role of bi- modal input. In Y. Gambier, A. Caimi & C. Mariotti (eds.), Subtitles and language learning: Principles, strategies and practical experiences, 173–198. Bern: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar

Clark, J. M. & A. Paivio. 1991. Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review 3(3). 149–210.10.1007/BF01320076Search in Google Scholar

Diao, Y., P. Chandler & J. Sweller. 2007. The effect of written text on comprehension of spoken English as a foreign language. The American Journal of Psychology 120(2). 237–261.10.2307/20445397Search in Google Scholar

Diao, Y. & J. Sweller. 2007. Redundancy in foreign language reading comprehension instruction: Concurrent written and spoken presentations. Learning and Instruction 17(1). 78–88.10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.11.007Search in Google Scholar

Ellis, R. & G. P. Barkhuizen. 2005. Analysing learner language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Field, J. 2008. Listening in the canguage classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Geary, D. C. 2008. An evolutionarily informed education science. Educational Psychologist 43(4). 179–195.10.1080/00461520802392133Search in Google Scholar

Graham, S. 2017. Research into practice: Listening strategies in an instructed classroom setting. Language Teaching 50(1). 107–119.10.1017/S0261444816000306Search in Google Scholar

Groot, A. D., F. Gobet & R. W. Jongman. 1996. Perception and memory in chess. ICGA Journal 19(3). 183–185.10.3233/ICG-1996-19306Search in Google Scholar

Kalyuga, S., P. Chandler & J. Sweller. 2004. When redundant on-screen text in multimedia technical instruction can interfere with learning. Human Factors 46(3). 567–581.10.1518/hfes.46.3.567.50405Search in Google Scholar

Kalyuga, S. & J. Sweller. 2014. The redundancy principle in multimedia learn- ing. In R. E. Mayer (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 2nd edn. 247–262 New York, NY.: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139547369.013Search in Google Scholar

Kartal, G. & H. Simsek. 2017. The effects of audiobooks on EFL students’ listening comprehension. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal 17(1). 112–123.Search in Google Scholar

Krashen, S. D. 1985. The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd.Search in Google Scholar

Leslie, K. C., R. Low, P. Jin & J. Sweller. 2012. Redundancy and expertise reversal effects when using educational technology to learn primary school science. Educational Technology Research and Development 60(1). 1–13.10.1007/s11423-011-9199-0Search in Google Scholar

Mayer, R. & L. Fiorella. 2014. Principle for reducing extraneous processing in multimedia learning: Coherence, signalling, redundancy, spatial contiguity, and temporal contiguity principles. In R. E. Mayer (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 2nd edn. 279–315. New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139547369.015Search in Google Scholar

Mayer, R. E., H. Lee & A. Peebles. 2014. Multimedia learning in a second language: A cognitive load perspective. Applied Cognitive Psychology 28(5). 653–660.10.1002/acp.3050Search in Google Scholar

Moreno, R. & R. E. Mayer. 2002. Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology 94(1). 156.10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.156Search in Google Scholar

Morton, J. 1969. Interaction of information in word recognition. Psychological Review 76(2). 165.10.1037/h0027366Search in Google Scholar

Paas, F., A. Renkl & J. Sweller. 2003. Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist 38(1). 1–4.10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1Search in Google Scholar

Paas, F. & J. Sweller. 2012. An evolutionary upgrade of cognitive load theory: Using the human motor system and collaboration to support the learning of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review 24(1). 27–45.10.1007/s10648-011-9179-2Search in Google Scholar

Paivio, A. 1990. Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195066661.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Perez, M. M., W. Van Den Noortgate & P. Desmet. 2013. Captioned video for L2 listening and vocabulary learning 29: A meta-analysis. System 41(3). 720–739.10.1016/j.system.2013.07.013Search in Google Scholar

Porte, G. K. 2015. Replication research in quantitative research. In J. D. Brown & C. Coombe (eds.), The Cambridge guide to research in language teaching and learning, 140–145. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Siegel, J. 2013. Exploring L2 listening instruction: Examinations of practice. ELT Journal 68(1). 22–30.10.1093/elt/cct058Search in Google Scholar

Siyanova-Chanturia, A. & S. Webb. 2016. Teaching vocabulary in the EFL context. In W. A. Renandya & H. P. Widodo (eds.), English language teaching today. Linking theory and practice, 227–240. Switzerland: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-38834-2_16Search in Google Scholar

Sweller, J. 1988. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science 12(2). 257–285.10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4Search in Google Scholar

Sweller, J. 1994. Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction 4(4). 295–312.10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5Search in Google Scholar

Sweller, J. 1999. Instructional design. In Australian Educational Review. 1501–1510Search in Google Scholar

Sweller, J. 2004. Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science 32(1–2). 9–31.10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021808.72598.4dSearch in Google Scholar

Sweller, J. 2009. Cognitive bases of human creativity. Educational Psychology Review 21(1). 11–19.10.1007/s10648-008-9091-6Search in Google Scholar

Sweller, J. 2010. Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review 22(2). 123–138.10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5Search in Google Scholar

Sweller, J. 2011. Cognitive load theory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation 55. 37–76.10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00002-8Search in Google Scholar

Sweller, J. 2016. Working memory, long-term memory, and instructional design. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 5(4). 360–367.10.1016/j.jarmac.2015.12.002Search in Google Scholar

Sweller, J. 2017. Cognitive load theory and teaching English as a second language to adult learners. Contact Magazine 43(1). 10–14.Search in Google Scholar

Sweller, J., P. Ayres & S. Kalyuga. 2011. Cognitive load theory. NY: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4Search in Google Scholar

Sweller, J. & P. Chandler. 1994. Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction 12(3). 185–233.10.1207/s1532690xci1203_1Search in Google Scholar

Sweller, J., P. A. Kirschner & R. E. Clark. 2007. Why minimally guided teaching techniques do not work: A reply to commentaries. Educational Psychologist 42(2). 115–121.10.1080/00461520701263426Search in Google Scholar

Tragant, E., C. Muñoz & N. Spada. 2016. Maximizing young learners’ input: An intervention program. Canadian Modern Language Review 72(2). 234–257.10.3138/cmlr.2942Search in Google Scholar

Tricot, A. & J. Sweller. 2014. Domain-specific knowledge and why teaching generic skills does not work. Educational Psychology Review 26(2). 265–283.10.1007/s10648-013-9243-1Search in Google Scholar

Vandergrift, L. 2007. Recent developments in second and foreign language listening comprehension research. Language Teaching 40(3). 191–210.10.1017/S0261444807004338Search in Google Scholar

Vandergrift, L. & C. C. Goh. 2012. Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in action. Routledge10.4324/9780203843376Search in Google Scholar

Vanderplank, R. 1988. The value of teletext sub-titles in language learning. ELT Journal 42(4). 272–281.10.1093/elt/42.4.272Search in Google Scholar

Vanderplank, R. 2016. Captioned media in foreign language learning and teaching: Subtitles for the deaf and hard-of-hearing as tools for language learning. Springer.10.1057/978-1-137-50045-8Search in Google Scholar

Winke, P., S. Gass & T. Syodorenko. 2010. The effects of captioning videos used for foreign language listening activities. Language Learning & Technology 14(1). 65–86.Search in Google Scholar

Wolvin, A. D. & C. G. Coakley. 1985. Listening. 2460 Kerper Blvd., Dubuque, IA 52001: Wm. C. Brown Publishers.Search in Google Scholar


Supplementary Material

The online version of this article offers supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2018-0350).


Published Online: 2019-10-30
Published in Print: 2022-09-27

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 20.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/iral-2018-0350/html
Scroll to top button