Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Text characteristics of task input and difficul...

Electronic data

  • Download

    Rights statement: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=SLA The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Second Language Acquisition, 35 (1), pp 31-65 2013, © 2013 Cambridge University Press.

    Final published version, 174 KB, PDF-document

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Text characteristics of task input and difficulty in second language listening comprehension

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>03/2013
<mark>Journal</mark>Studies in Second Language Acquisition
Issue number1
Volume35
Number of pages35
Pages (from-to)31-65
StatePublished
Original languageEnglish

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of a group of task factors on advanced ESL learners’ actual and perceived listening performance. We examined whether the speed, linguistic complexity, and explicitness of the listening text and characteristics of the text necessary for task completion influence comprehension. We also explored what textual factors learners perceived as causing difficulty. The participants were sixty-eight students who performed 18 versions of a listening task, each followed by a perception questionnaire. Nine additional students engaged in stimulated recall. The listening texts were analysed in terms of a variety of measures, utilizing Praat v5.0.25, Cohmetrix v2.0, and WebVocabProfiler v3. We used Rasch and regression analyses to estimate task difficulty and its relationship to the text characteristics. Six measures emerged as significant predictors of task difficulty, including indicators of lexical range, density, and diversity, and causal content. The stimulated recall comments were more reflective of these findings than the questionnaire responses.

Bibliographic note

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=SLA The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Second Language Acquisition, 35 (1), pp 31-65 2013, © 2013 Cambridge University Press.