Topic
Interaction hypothesis
About: Interaction hypothesis is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 146 publications have been published within this topic receiving 8487 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
Book•
18 Dec 2001
TL;DR: In this article, the authors define listening as co-construction of meaning and discuss the role of listening in learning to listen and how to learn to listen from a pragmatic perspective.
Abstract: Contents General Editors' Preface ix Acknowledgements xi Preface xii Introduction: Perspectives on listening Section I Defining listening Introduction: The nature of processing 1 Neurological processing 1.1 Hearing 1.2 Consciousness 1.3 Attention 1.4 Individual differences in neurological processes Summary: Organization of neurological processing 2 Linguistic processing 2.1 Perceiving speech 2.2 Identifying units of spoken language 2.3 Using prosodic features in processing speech 2.4 Recognizing words 2.5 Employing phonotactic knowledge 2.6 Utilizing syntactic parsing 2.7 Integrating non-verbal cues into linguistic processing Summary: Unification of linguistic processing 3 Semantic processing 3.1 Comprehension: The role of knowledge structures 3.2 Cognitive understanding: The role of schemas 3.3 Social understanding: The role of common ground 3.4 The role of inference in constructing meaning 3.5 Listener enrichment of input 3.6 Problem-solving during comprehension 3.7 Reasoning during comprehension 3.8 Compensatory strategies during comprehension 3.9 Memory building during comprehension 3.10 Comprehension and learning Summary: Comprehension and understanding 4 Pragmatic processing 4.1 Listening from a pragmatic perspective 4.2 Inferring speaker intention 4.3 Detecting deception 4.4 Enriching speaker meaning 4.5 Invoking social expectations 4.6 Adjusting affective involvement 4.7 Formulating responses 4.8 Connecting with the speaker Summary: Listening as co-construction of meaning 5 Automatic processing 5.1 Goals of automatic processing 5.2 Linguistic processing 5.1.2 Syntactic processing 5.3 Semantic processing 5.4 Pragmatic processing Summary: Automatic processing and human language processing 6 Listening in language acquisition 6.1 Listening in L1 acquisition: Development of linguistic processing 6.1.1 Lexical acquisition 6.2 Listening in L1 acquisition: Development of semantic processing 6.3 Listening in L1 acquisition: Development of pragmatic processing 6.4 Listening in L2 acquisition: Development of linguistic processing 6.4.1 Syntactic development 6.4.2 Lexical development 6.5 Listening in L2 acquisition: Development of semantic processing 6.6 Listening in L2 acquisition: Development of pragmatic processing Summary: Comparison of L1 and L2 language acquisition Section II Teaching listening Introduction: The role of teaching in learning to listen 7 Approaches to teaching listening 7.1 Contexts for teaching listening 7.2 SLA research and language pedagogy 7.2.1 Affective filter hypothesis 7.2.2 Input hypothesis 7.2.3 Interaction hypothesis 7.2.4 Processability hypothesis 7.2.5 Meta-cognition hypothesis 7.2.6 Sociocultural hypothesis 7.3 Development of listening instruction Summary: A balanced approach for teaching listening 8 Input and interaction 8.1 Relevance 8.2 Genres 8.2.1 Narrative 8.2.2 Descriptive 8.3 Authenticity 8.4 Vocabulary 8.5 Difficulty 8.6 Simplification 8.7 Restructuring 8.8 Interaction 8.9 Strategies Summary: Quantity and quality in input and interaction 9 Instructional design 9.1 Structuring learning sequences 9.2 Intensive listening 9.3 Selective listening 9.4 Interactive listening 9.5 Extensive listening 9.6 Responsive listening 9.7 Autonomous listening Summary: Fresh instructional design 10 Listening assessment 10.1 Defining the social and educational context for assessment 10.2 Developing criteria and constructs 10.3 Formulating a model of listening for assessment 10.4 Creating forms of assessment 10.5 Adjusting factors that influence test performance 10.6 Modeling listener processes during assessment 10.7 Assessing listening proficiency in oral interview tests 10.8 Describing listening proficiency Summary: Fairness in assessment Section III Researching listening Section introduction: Direct insight 11 Sociolinguistic orientations 11.1 Listener perspective 11.2 Listener participation 11.3 Listener response 11.4 Listeners in cross-cultural interactions Summary: The social dimension of language 12 Psycholinguistic orientations 12.1 Listener processing 12.2 Listener memory 12.3 Listener misunderstandings 12.4 Listener strategies Summary: Access to psycholinguistic processes 13 Developmental orientations 13.1 Academic listening 13.2 Listening materials 13.3 Autonomous listening 13.4 Teacher training Summary: Mixed methods of research Section IV Exploring listening 14 Resources for further exploration 14.1 Resources for teaching listening 14.1.1 Published sources 14.1.2 Internet sources 14.1.3 Online listening courses 14.1.4 Directories 14.2 Resources for researching listening 14.2.1 Research networks 14.2.2 Research tools 14.2.3 Research sources and avenues for dissemination Summary: Exploring, researching, teaching Glossary References Index
1,093 citations
TL;DR: Surprisingly, students learned just as effectively even when tutors were suppressed from giving explanations and feedback, and their learning in the interactive style of tutoring is attributed to construction from deeper and a greater amount of scaffolding episodes, as well as their greater effort to take control of their own learning by reading more.
929 citations
TL;DR: This paper examined the relationship between different types of conversational interaction and SLA and found that implicit negative feedback, which can be obtained through negotiated interaction, facilitates SLA, while active participation in interaction and the developmental level of the learner were considered.
Abstract: This study examines the relationship between different types of conversational interaction and SLA. Long's (1996) updated version of the interactionist hypothesis claims that implicit negative feedback, which can be obtained through negotiated interaction, facilitates SLA. Similar claims for the benefits of negotiation have been made by Pica (1994) and Gass (1997). Some support for the interaction hypothesis has been provided by studies that have explored the effects of interaction on production (Gass & Varonis, 1994), on lexical acquisition (Ellis, Tanaka, & Yamazaki, 1994), on the short-term outcomes of pushed output (see Swain, 1995), and for specific interactional features such as recasts (Long, Inagaki, & Ortega, 1998; Mackey & Philp, 1998). However, other studies have not found effects for interaction on grammatical development (Loschky, 1994). The central question addressed by the current study was: Can conversational interaction facilitate second language development? The study employed a pretest-posttest design. Adult ESL learners (N = 34) of varying L1 backgrounds were divided into four experimental groups and one control group. They took part in task-based interaction. Research questions focused on the developmental outcomes of taking part in various types of interaction. Active participation in interaction and the developmental level of the learner were considered. Results of this study support claims concerning a link between interaction and grammatical development and highlight the importance of active participation in the interaction.
769 citations
TL;DR: The authors explored learners' perceptions about feedback provided to them through task-based dyadic interaction and found that learners were relatively accurate in their perceptions about lexical, semantic, and phonological feedback.
Abstract: Theoretical claims about the benefits of conversational interaction have been made by Gass (1997), Long (1996), Pica (1994), and others. The Interaction Hypothesis suggests that negotiated interaction can facilitate SLA and that one reason for this could be that, during interaction, learners may receive feedback on their utterances. An interesting issue, which has challenged interactional research, concerns how learners perceive feedback and whether their perceptions affect their subsequent L2 development. The present research addresses the first of these issues–learners' perceptions about interactional feedback. The study, involving 10 learners of English as a second language and 7 learners of Italian as a foreign language, explores learners' perceptions about feedback provided to them through task-based dyadic interaction. Learners received feedback focused on a range of morphosyntactic, lexical, and phonological forms. After completing the tasks, learners watched videotapes of their previous interactions and were asked to introspect about their thoughts at the time the original interactions were in progress. The results showed that learners were relatively accurate in their perceptions about lexical, semantic, and phonological feedback. However, morphosyntactic feedback was generally not perceived as such. Furthermore, the nature as well as the content of the feedback may have affected learners' perceptions.
740 citations
Book•
1 Jan 1999TL;DR: This book examines different theoretical perspectives on the role that interaction plays in second language acquisition, including those afforded by the Interaction Hypothesis, Socio-Cultural Theory and the Levels of Processing model.
Abstract: This book examines different theoretical perspectives on the role that interaction plays in second language acquisition The principal perspectives are those afforded by the Interaction Hypothesis, Socio-Cultural Theory and the Levels of Processing model Interaction is, therefore, defined broadly; it is seen as involving both intermental and intramental activity The theoretical perspectives are explored empirically in a series of studies which investigate the relationship between aspects of interaction and second language acquisition A number of these studies consider the effects of interaction on the acquisition of vocabulary (word meanings) by both adult and child L2 learners In addition, the effects of language aptitude on input processing are considered Further studies consider the contribution that interaction makes to the acquisition of grammatical knowledge These studies provide clear evidence that social and intermental interaction are major forces in the acquisition of an L2 Finally, the book, considers a number of pedagogic specifications In particular, the importance of discourse control as a means of learners’ obtaining the quality of interaction likely to foster acquisition is discussed
666 citations
Related Topics (5)
Performance Metrics
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2021 | 6 |
| 2020 | 2 |
| 2019 | 6 |
| 2018 | 2 |
| 2017 | 5 |
| 2016 | 5 |