Effects of textual enhancement on L2 development: a meta-analysis
-
Ehsan Rassaei
und
Shadab Jabbarpoor
Abstract
This meta-analysis examines the effects of textual enhancement (TE) on second language (L2) development by synthesizing findings from 29 primary studies involving 1749 participants. These studies were selected based on carefully defined inclusion criteria and an evaluation of the homogeneity of the primary studies’ effect sizes. The results reveal an overall small to medium combined aggregate effect size (g = 0.54) for between-subject comparisons, suggesting that TE has a modest impact on L2 learning. Moderator analyses indicate that TE has equal effects on the development of grammatical and lexical knowledge. Additionally, the findings show that employing multiple TE techniques does not significantly enhance its effectiveness compared to using a single technique, suggesting a ceiling effect in how much TE can contribute to the noticing of target features. The results indicated a smaller effect size for learners with lower proficiency compared to those with intermediate and advanced proficiency levels, although the difference was not statistically significant. Finally, the findings indicated that the effect of TE on L2 development is not moderated by the mode of delivery (i.e., paper-based vs. digital materials). Overall, these findings contribute to the ongoing debate on the role of noticing in L2 acquisition, suggesting that while TE facilitates language learning, its impact may be limited and should be interpreted with care.
-
Research ethics: Not applicable.
-
Informed consent: Not applicable.
-
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: None declared.
-
Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.
-
Research funding: None declared.
-
Data availability: Not applicable.
References
Alanen, R. 1995. Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition. In R. Schmidt (ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning, 259–302. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Alsadhan, R. O. 2011. Effect of textual enhancement and explicit rule presentation on the noticing and acquisition of L2 grammatical structures, a meta-analysis (Master’s thesis). Colorado State University.Suche in Google Scholar
Boers, F., M. Demecheleer, L. He, J. Deconinck, H. Stengers & J. Eyckmans. 2017. Typographic enhancement of multiword units in second language text. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 27(2). 448–469. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12141.Suche in Google Scholar
Celik, B. 2024. The effects of input flood and input enhancement techniques in teaching collocations to EFL learners. Forum for Linguistic Studies 6(1). 1–14. https://doi.org/10.59400/fls.v6i1.2088.Suche in Google Scholar
Cho, M. Y. 2010. The effects of input enhancement and written recall on noticing and acquisition. Innovations in Language Learning and Teaching 4(1). 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501220903388900.Suche in Google Scholar
Choi, S. 2016. Processing and learning of enhanced English collocations: An eye movement study. Language Teaching Research 21(3). 403–426. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816653271.Suche in Google Scholar
Chung, Y. & A. Révész. 2024. Investigating the effect of textual enhancement in post-reading tasks on grammatical development by child language learners. Language Teaching Research 28(2). 632–653. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221129994.Suche in Google Scholar
Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Suche in Google Scholar
Comeaux, I. & J. L. McDonald. 2018. Determining the effectiveness of visual input enhancement across multiple linguistic cues. Language Learning 68(1). 5–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12290.Suche in Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. 2003. Implicit and explicit learning. In C. Doughty & M. Long (eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition, 313–348. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470756492.ch11Suche in Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. 2015. Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction, 94–112. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.Suche in Google Scholar
Doughty, C. & J. Williams. 1998. Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Egi, T. 2010. Uptake, modified output, and learner perceptions of recasts: Learner responses as language awareness. The Modern Language Journal 94. 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00980.x.Suche in Google Scholar
El-Dakhs, D. A., F. Ambreen & M. Zaheer. 2019. The effect of textual enhancement on collocation learning: The case of Arab EFL learners. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 16(1). 114–139. https://doi.org/10.56040/dnas1618.Suche in Google Scholar
Fang, T. 2014. Effects of textual enhancement on English as a foreign language learners’ anaphor resolution performance and reading comprehension in Taiwan. Journal of Research in Reading 39(3). 347–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12045.Suche in Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H., E. S. Park & C. H. Combs. 2008. Textual enhancement of input: Issues and possibilities. Applied Linguistics 29(4). 597–618. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amn010.Suche in Google Scholar
He, C., L. Cai & X. Li. 2024. The effect of input enhancement on vocabulary incidental acquisition in junior high school English reading instruction. International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology 6(7). 7–14.10.25236/IJFS.2024.060702Suche in Google Scholar
Indrarathne, B., M. Ratajczak & J. Kormos. 2018. Modelling changes in the cognitive processing of grammar in implicit and explicit learning conditions: Insights from an eye-tracking study. Language Learning 68(3). 669–708. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12290.Suche in Google Scholar
Izumi, S. 2002. Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis: An experimental study on ESL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24(4). 541–577. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263102004023.Suche in Google Scholar
Jung, J., M. J. Stainer & M. H. Tran. 2022. The impact of textual enhancement and frequency manipulation on incidental learning of collocations from reading. Language Teaching Research 29(6). 2679–2708. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221129994.Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Y. 2006. Effects of input elaboration on vocabulary acquisition through reading by Korean learners of English as a foreign language. Tesol Quarterly 40(2). 341–373. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264526.Suche in Google Scholar
LaBrozzi, R. M. 2016. The effects of textual enhancement type on L2 form recognition and reading comprehension in Spanish. Language Teaching Research 20(1). 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814561903.Suche in Google Scholar
Lakens, D. 2013. Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology 4. 863. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863.Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, S. K. 2006. A synthesis of research on the effects of typographical visual input enhancement. English Teaching 61(3). 169–187.Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, S. K. 2007. Effects of textual enhancement and topic familiarity on Korean EFL students’ reading comprehension and learning of passive voice. Language Learning 57(1). 87–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00400.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, B. J. 2021. The effects of proficiency and textual enhancement technique on noticing. System 96. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102407.Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, S. K. & H. T. Huang. 2008. Visual input enhancement and grammar learning: A meta-analytic review. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 30(2). 307–331. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263108080479.Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, M. & J. Jung. 2024. Effects of textual enhancement and task manipulation on L2 learners’ attentional processes and grammatical knowledge development: A mixed methods study. Language Teaching Research 28(4). 1552–1571. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211034640.Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, M. & A. Révész. 2018. Promoting grammatical development through textually enhanced captions: An eye-tracking study. The Modern Language Journal 102(3). 557–577. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12503.Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, M. & A. Révész. 2020. Promoting grammatical development through captions and textual enhancement in multimodal input-based tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 42(3). 625–651. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263120000108.Suche in Google Scholar
Leow, R., T. Egi, A. Nuevo & Y. Tsai. 2003. The roles of textual enhancement and type of linguistic item in adult L2 learners’ comprehension and intake. Applied Language Learning 13(1). 1–16.Suche in Google Scholar
Li, S. 2010. The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning 60(2). 309–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Li, S. 2014. Recasts, working memory, and the choice of target structure. In Z. Han (ed.), Second language acquisition of Chinese: A series of empirical studies, 103–125. Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.10.2307/jj.26931962.9Suche in Google Scholar
Lipsey, M. W. & D. B. Wilson. 2001. Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Suche in Google Scholar
Loewen, S. & S. Inceoglu. 2016. The effectiveness of visual input enhancement on the noticing and L2 development of the Spanish past tense. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 6(1). 89–110. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2016.6.1.5.Suche in Google Scholar
Long, M. 1991. Focus on form: A design feature in language methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg & C. Kramsch (eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective, 39–52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sibil.2.07lonSuche in Google Scholar
Long, M. 2000. Focus on form in task-based language teaching. In R. Lambert & E. Shohamy (eds.), Language policy and pedagogy: Essays in honor of A. Ronald Walton, 179–192. Philadelphia / Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.96.11lonSuche in Google Scholar
Lyddon, P. A. 2011. The efficacy of corrective feedback and textual enhancement in promoting the acquisition of grammatical redundancies. Modern Language Journal 95(S1). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01272.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Mackey, A. & J. Philp. 1998. Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? Modern Language Journal 82(3). 338–356. https://doi.org/10.2307/329960.Suche in Google Scholar
Majuddin, E., A. Siyanova-Chanturia & F. Boers. 2021. Incidental acquisition of multiword expressions through audiovisual materials: The role of repetition and typographic enhancement. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 43(5). 985–1008. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263121000056.Suche in Google Scholar
Maynard, R., N. Dong & I. Perez-Johnson. 2007. Issues in calculating average effect sizes in meta-analyses. Administration for Children and Families Workshop on Effect Sizes.Suche in Google Scholar
Meguro, Y. 2019. Textual enhancement, grammar learning, reading comprehension, and tag questions. Language Teaching Research 23(1). 58–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817714277.Suche in Google Scholar
Moradi, M. & M. T. Farvardin. 2016. A comparative study of effects of input-based, meaning-based output, and traditional instructions on EFL learners’ grammar learning. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics 7(2). 99–119.Suche in Google Scholar
Nahavandi, N. & J. Mukundan. 2014. The impact of textual input enhancement on Iranian elementary EFL learners’ vocabulary intake. Asian Social Science 10(21). 216. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n21p216.Suche in Google Scholar
Nation, P. 2001. Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524759Suche in Google Scholar
Norris, J. & L. Ortega. 2000. Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning 50(3). 417–528. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00136.Suche in Google Scholar
Pattemore, A. & C. Muñoz. 2022. Captions and learnability factors in learning grammar from audio-visual input. JALT CALL Journal 18(1). 83–109. https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v18n1.546.Suche in Google Scholar
Pawlak, M. & A. Mystkowska-Wiertelak (eds.). 2017. Challenges of second and foreign language education in a globalized world: Studies in honor of Krystyna Droździał-Szelest. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-66975-5Suche in Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. & Y. Kim. 2016. Task-based learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 36. 73–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190516000015.Suche in Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. & F. L. Oswald. 2014. How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning 64(4). 878–912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079.Suche in Google Scholar
Preciado-Sánchez, A. M. & J. L. Moreno-Vega. 2024. The effects of type of instruction of English prepositions with varying degrees of salience. Lenguaje 52(02). e20513344. https://doi.org/10.25100/lenguaje.v52i02.13344.Suche in Google Scholar
Puimège, E., M. Montero Perez & E. Peters. 2023. Promoting L2 acquisition of multiword units through textually enhanced audiovisual input: An eye-tracking study. Second Language Research 39(2). 471–492. https://doi.org/10.1177/02676583221129994.Suche in Google Scholar
Rassaei, E. 2012. The effects of input-based and output-based instruction on L2 development. TESL-EJ 16(3). 1–26.Suche in Google Scholar
Rassaei, E. 2014. Effects of textual enhancement and input enrichment on L2 development. TESOL Journal 6(2). 281–301. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.149.Suche in Google Scholar
Rassaei, E. 2020. The separate and combined effects of recasts and textual enhancement as two focus on form techniques on L2 development. System 89. 102–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.102193.Suche in Google Scholar
Reinders, H. & R. Ellis. 2009. The effects of two types of input on intake and the acquisition of implicit and explicit knowledge. In R. Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Philp & H. Reinders (eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching, 3–25. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847691767Suche in Google Scholar
Révész, A., L. Bunting, A. Florea, R. Gilabert, Y. Hård af Segerstad, I. P. Mihu, C. Parry, L. Benton & A. Vasalou. 2021. The effects of multiple-exposure textual enhancement on child L2 learners’ development in derivational morphology: A multisite study. Tesol Quarterly 55(3). 901–930. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3036.Suche in Google Scholar
Robinson, P. 1996. Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18(1). 27–67. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100014674.Suche in Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11(2). 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129.Suche in Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. 2001. Attention. In P. Robinson (ed.), Cognition and second language instruction, 3–32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003Suche in Google Scholar
Schmitt, N. 2010. Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230293977Suche in Google Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M. 1993. Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15(2). 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100011943.Suche in Google Scholar
Simard, D. 2009. Differential effects of textual enhancement formats on intake. System 37(1). 124–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.06.005.Suche in Google Scholar
Song, M. J. 2007. Getting learners’ attention: Typographical input enhancement, output, and their combined effects. English Teaching 62(2). 193–215. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.62.2.200706.193.Suche in Google Scholar
Spada, N. & Y. Tomita. 2010. Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning 60(2). 263–308. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00562.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Suurmond, R., H. van Rhee & T. Hak. 2017. Introduction, comparison, and validation of meta-essentials: A free and simple tool for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods 8(4). 537–553. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1260.Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, M. 2005. The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (ed.), Handbook on research in second language teaching and learning, 471–484, Getting Learners’ Attention: Typographical Input Enhancement, Output, and Their Combined Effects 213. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Suche in Google Scholar
Szudarski, P. & R. Carter. 2016. The role of input flood and input enhancement in EFL learners’ acquisition of collocations. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 26(2). 245–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12100.Suche in Google Scholar
Toomer, M., I. Elgort & A. Coxhead. 2024. Contextual learning of L2 lexical and grammatical collocations with and without typographic enhancement. System 121. 103235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103235.Suche in Google Scholar
Torkabad, M. G. & A. M. Fazilatfar. 2014. Textual enhancement and input processing effects on the intake of present and past simple tenses. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 98. 562–571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.449.Suche in Google Scholar
Toth, P. D. 2006. Processing instruction and a role for output in second language acquisition. Language Learning 56(2). 319–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2006.00349.x.Suche in Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. 2004. Input processing in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten (ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary, 5–31. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.10.4324/9781410610195Suche in Google Scholar
Vu, D. V. & E. Peters. 2022. Learning vocabulary from reading-only, reading-while-listening, and reading with textual input enhancement: Insights from Vietnamese EFL learners. RELC Journal 53(1). 85–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220944158.Suche in Google Scholar
White, J. 1998. Getting the learners’ attention. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, 85–113. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Winke, P. M. 2013. The effects of input enhancement on grammar learning and comprehension: A modified replication of Lee (2007) with eye-movement data. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 35(2). 323–352. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000903.Suche in Google Scholar
Wong, W. 2003. Textual enhancement and simplified input: Effects on L2 comprehension and acquisition of non-meaningful grammatical form. Applied Language Learning 13(2). 17–45.Suche in Google Scholar
Zanjan, F. R. 2017. The impact of teachers’ aural input enhancement vs. textual enhancement in learners’ awareness of ungrammatical forms. International Journal of English Linguistics 7(5). 190–195. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v7n5p190.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
