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).
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- A double-edged sword: Metaphor and metonymy through pictures for learning idioms
- The functional roles of lexical devices in second language learners’ encoding of temporality: A study of Mandarin Chinese-speaking ESL learners
- The same cloze for all occasions?
- The effect of written text on comprehension of spoken English as a foreign language: A replication study
- Cut-offs and co-occurring gestures: Similarities between speakers’ first and second languages
- Bilingual patterns of path encoding: A study of Polish L1-German L2 and Polish L1-Spanish L2 speakers
- Concordancing in writing pedagogy and CAF measures of writing
- D-linked and non-d-linked wh-questions in L2 French and L3 English
- Effects of pragmatic instruction on EFL teenagers’ apologetic email writing: Comprehension, production, and cognitive processes
- Music training and the use of songs or rhythm: Do they help for lexical stress processing?
- Second language processing of English past tense morphology: The role of working memory
- Recasts versus clarification requests: The relevance of linguistic target, proficiency, and communicative ability
- The role of self-construal in EFL vocabulary learning
- The cross-sectional development of verb–noun collocations as constructions in L2 writing
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- A double-edged sword: Metaphor and metonymy through pictures for learning idioms
- The functional roles of lexical devices in second language learners’ encoding of temporality: A study of Mandarin Chinese-speaking ESL learners
- The same cloze for all occasions?
- The effect of written text on comprehension of spoken English as a foreign language: A replication study
- Cut-offs and co-occurring gestures: Similarities between speakers’ first and second languages
- Bilingual patterns of path encoding: A study of Polish L1-German L2 and Polish L1-Spanish L2 speakers
- Concordancing in writing pedagogy and CAF measures of writing
- D-linked and non-d-linked wh-questions in L2 French and L3 English
- Effects of pragmatic instruction on EFL teenagers’ apologetic email writing: Comprehension, production, and cognitive processes
- Music training and the use of songs or rhythm: Do they help for lexical stress processing?
- Second language processing of English past tense morphology: The role of working memory
- Recasts versus clarification requests: The relevance of linguistic target, proficiency, and communicative ability
- The role of self-construal in EFL vocabulary learning
- The cross-sectional development of verb–noun collocations as constructions in L2 writing