Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Attentional Processing of Input in Different In...
View graph of relations

Attentional Processing of Input in Different Input Conditions: an Eye Tracking Study

Research output: Contribution to conference - Without ISBN/ISSN Abstractpeer-review

Published

Standard

Attentional Processing of Input in Different Input Conditions: an Eye Tracking Study. / Indrarathne, Bimali ; Kormos, Judit.
2015. Abstract from BAAL Language Learning and Teaching SIG Conference, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.

Research output: Contribution to conference - Without ISBN/ISSN Abstractpeer-review

Harvard

Indrarathne, B & Kormos, J 2015, 'Attentional Processing of Input in Different Input Conditions: an Eye Tracking Study', BAAL Language Learning and Teaching SIG Conference, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 2/07/15 - 3/07/15.

APA

Indrarathne, B., & Kormos, J. (2015). Attentional Processing of Input in Different Input Conditions: an Eye Tracking Study. Abstract from BAAL Language Learning and Teaching SIG Conference, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.

Vancouver

Indrarathne B, Kormos J. Attentional Processing of Input in Different Input Conditions: an Eye Tracking Study. 2015. Abstract from BAAL Language Learning and Teaching SIG Conference, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.

Author

Indrarathne, Bimali ; Kormos, Judit. / Attentional Processing of Input in Different Input Conditions: an Eye Tracking Study. Abstract from BAAL Language Learning and Teaching SIG Conference, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.

Bibtex

@conference{697116d7fc154a8ca4dea3727ac657ce,
title = "Attentional Processing of Input in Different Input Conditions: an Eye Tracking Study",
abstract = "The aim of the study reported in this presentation was to investigate how learners pay attention to target items in written L2 input in different input conditions and as a result how their knowledge of a target construction changes. We investigated this in an eye-tracking study conducted with 100 adult L2 learners. Four experimental groups received different types of input: unenhanced (unenhanced only), textually enhanced (enhanced only), textually enhanced with specific instructions asking participants to pay attention to the highlighted construction (enhanced+ instructions) and explicit explanation of the target construction in addition to enhancement and instructions (enhanced+ instruction+ explanation). The unenhanced only and enhanced only groups demonstrated a random pattern of total fixation duration (TFD) and difference between observed and expected total fixation duration (DTFD). The enhanced +instructions and enhanced+ instructions+ explanationgroups, however, showed a high TFD and DTFD at the beginning of the exposure. Parallel to this, statistically significant increase in the pre-post test gain score was observed in enhanced+ instructions and enhanced+ instructions+ explanation groups compared to the control and the unenhanced only groups. TFD and DTFD showed a significant correlation with the gain score of enhanced+ instructions+ explanation group and also DTFD with the gain score of enhanced+ instructions and enhanced only groups. The findings indicate that unenhanced or enhanced only input was not effective in improving performance in the post-test. Either specific instruction to pay attention to target features in the input or explicit explanation was needed for measurable gains in knowledge.",
author = "Bimali Indrarathne and Judit Kormos",
year = "2015",
month = jul,
day = "3",
language = "English",
note = "BAAL Language Learning and Teaching SIG Conference ; Conference date: 02-07-2015 Through 03-07-2015",
url = "http://www.intranet.education.ed.ac.uk/Research/Conferences/BAALSIG2015/",

}

RIS

TY - CONF

T1 - Attentional Processing of Input in Different Input Conditions: an Eye Tracking Study

AU - Indrarathne, Bimali

AU - Kormos, Judit

PY - 2015/7/3

Y1 - 2015/7/3

N2 - The aim of the study reported in this presentation was to investigate how learners pay attention to target items in written L2 input in different input conditions and as a result how their knowledge of a target construction changes. We investigated this in an eye-tracking study conducted with 100 adult L2 learners. Four experimental groups received different types of input: unenhanced (unenhanced only), textually enhanced (enhanced only), textually enhanced with specific instructions asking participants to pay attention to the highlighted construction (enhanced+ instructions) and explicit explanation of the target construction in addition to enhancement and instructions (enhanced+ instruction+ explanation). The unenhanced only and enhanced only groups demonstrated a random pattern of total fixation duration (TFD) and difference between observed and expected total fixation duration (DTFD). The enhanced +instructions and enhanced+ instructions+ explanationgroups, however, showed a high TFD and DTFD at the beginning of the exposure. Parallel to this, statistically significant increase in the pre-post test gain score was observed in enhanced+ instructions and enhanced+ instructions+ explanation groups compared to the control and the unenhanced only groups. TFD and DTFD showed a significant correlation with the gain score of enhanced+ instructions+ explanation group and also DTFD with the gain score of enhanced+ instructions and enhanced only groups. The findings indicate that unenhanced or enhanced only input was not effective in improving performance in the post-test. Either specific instruction to pay attention to target features in the input or explicit explanation was needed for measurable gains in knowledge.

AB - The aim of the study reported in this presentation was to investigate how learners pay attention to target items in written L2 input in different input conditions and as a result how their knowledge of a target construction changes. We investigated this in an eye-tracking study conducted with 100 adult L2 learners. Four experimental groups received different types of input: unenhanced (unenhanced only), textually enhanced (enhanced only), textually enhanced with specific instructions asking participants to pay attention to the highlighted construction (enhanced+ instructions) and explicit explanation of the target construction in addition to enhancement and instructions (enhanced+ instruction+ explanation). The unenhanced only and enhanced only groups demonstrated a random pattern of total fixation duration (TFD) and difference between observed and expected total fixation duration (DTFD). The enhanced +instructions and enhanced+ instructions+ explanationgroups, however, showed a high TFD and DTFD at the beginning of the exposure. Parallel to this, statistically significant increase in the pre-post test gain score was observed in enhanced+ instructions and enhanced+ instructions+ explanation groups compared to the control and the unenhanced only groups. TFD and DTFD showed a significant correlation with the gain score of enhanced+ instructions+ explanation group and also DTFD with the gain score of enhanced+ instructions and enhanced only groups. The findings indicate that unenhanced or enhanced only input was not effective in improving performance in the post-test. Either specific instruction to pay attention to target features in the input or explicit explanation was needed for measurable gains in knowledge.

M3 - Abstract

T2 - BAAL Language Learning and Teaching SIG Conference

Y2 - 2 July 2015 through 3 July 2015

ER -