Article published In: Learning and Teaching L2 Writing:
Guest-edited by Daphne van Weijen, Elke Van Steendam and Gert Rijlaarsdam
[ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 156] 2008
► pp. 203–226
Differences in Process and Process-Product Relations in L2 Writing
Published online: 1 January 2008
https://doi.org/10.2143/ITL.156.0.2034433
https://doi.org/10.2143/ITL.156.0.2034433
Abstract
This study examines whether writers vary how they write under influence of the changing task situation when writing in a second language (L2) and, if so, whether differences in the way they write are related to variations in text quality. Twenty first year students wrote four texts each in their L2 (English) under think-aloud conditions. The analysis focused on four cognitive activities: Reading the assignment and sources, Planning, Generating ideas and Formulating. Results indicate that, on average, the occurrence of each activity varies during the writing process. In addition, writers differ in the extent that they vary their process execution (i.e., the way they apply different activities) while writing. These differences, however, depend on the moment in the writing process, and on the activity being carried out. In general, writers’ behaviour is rather stable between tasks, at least at the start of the writing process. Finally, results indicate that the correlation between each activity and text quality varies during the writing process and also differs somewhat between tasks.
References (49)
Beare, S., & Bourdages, J. S. (2007). Skilled writers’ generating strategies in L1 and L2: an exploratory study. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), M. Torrance, L. Van Waes & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Studies in Writing Vol. 20, Writing and cognition: Research and applications (pp. 151–161). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Breetvelt, I., Van den Bergh, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1994). Relations between writing processes and text quality: when and how? Cognition and Instruction, 12 (2), 103–123.
Breuker, J. A., Elshout, J. J., Van Someren, M. W., & Wielinga, B. J. (1986). Hardopdenken en protokolanalyse [Thinking aloud and protocol analysis]. Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch, 11 (5), 241–254.
Broekkamp, H., & Van den Bergh, H. (1996). Attention strategies in revising a foreign language text. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Studies in Writing Vol. 2, Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp. 170–181). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Carey, L., & J., & Flower, L. (1989). Foundations for creativity in the writing process: Rhetorical representations of ill-defined problems (Tech. Rep. No. 32). Berkeley, CA; and Pittsburgh, PA: Center for the Study of Writing.
Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J. R. (2001). Fluency in writing, generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18 (1), 80–98.
Couzijn, M., Van den Bergh, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2002). Writing Processes and text quality: effects of L1/L2. Paper presented at the SIG Writing ‘02 Conference, Staffordshire, UK.
Cumming, A. (2001). Learning to write in a second language: two decades of research. International Journal of English Studies, 1 (2), 1–23.
Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 26 (1), 59–84.
Ellis, R., Yuan, F. (2005). The effects of careful within-task planning on oral and written task performance. In N. Spada & J. Hulstijn (Series Eds.), R. Ellis (Ed.), Language learning and language teaching Vol. 11, Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 167–192). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Ericsson, K. A. (1998). Protocol analysis. In W. Bechteld & G. Graham (Eds.), A Companion to Cognitive Science (pp. 425–432). Oxford: Blackwell.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal Reports as Data. Psychological Review, 87 (3), 215–251.
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1980). The Dynamics of composing: making plans and juggling constraints. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 31–50). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(1981). Plans that guide the composing process. In C. H. Frederiksen & J. F. Dominic (Eds.), Writing: The nature, development and teaching of written communication. Volume 2: Writing: process, development and communication (pp. 39–58). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Grabe, W. (2001). Notes toward a theory of second language writing. In T. Silva & P. K. Matsuda (Eds.), On Second Language Writing (pp. 39–57). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3–30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hayes, J. R., & Gradwohl Nash, J. (1996). On the nature of planning in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences & applications (pp. 29–55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Janssen, D., Van Waes, L., & Van den Bergh, H. (1996). Effects of thinking aloud on writing processes. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences & applications (pp. 233–250). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jones, S., & Tetroe, J. (1987). Composing in a second language. In A. Matsuhashi (Ed.), Writing in real time; Modelling production processes (pp. 34–57). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Kennedy, M. L. (1985). The composing process of college students writing from sources. Written Communication, 2 (4), 434–456.
Levy, C. M., Marek, J. P., & Lea, J. (1996). Concurrent and retrospective protocols in writing research. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Studies in Writing Vol. 2, Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp. 542–556). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Levy, C. M., & Ransdell, S. (1995). Is writing as difficult as it seems? Memory and Cognition, 23 (6), 767–779.
Manchón, R. M., Murphy, L., & Roca de Larios, J. (2005). Using concurrent protocols to explore L2 writing Processes: methodological issues in the collection and analysis of data. In P. K. Matsuda & T. Silva (Eds.), Second language writing research; perspectives on the process of knowledge construction (pp. 191–205). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Qi, D. S. (1998). An inquiry into language-switching in second language composing processes. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des languages vivantes, 54 (3), 413–435.
Rijlaarsdam, G., & Van den Bergh, H. (1996). The dynamics of composing-an agenda for research into an interactive compensatory model of writing: many questions, some answers. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences & applications (pp. 107–125). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(2006). Writing process theory: a functional dynamic approach. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), The handbook of writing research (pp. 41–53). NY: Guilford Publications.
Roca de Larios, J., Manchón, R. M., & Murphy, L. (2006). Generating text in native and foreign language writing: a temporal analysis of problem-solving formulation processes. The Modern Language Journal, 90 (i), 100–114.
Roca de Larios, J., Marín, J., & Murphy, L. (2001). A temporal analysis of formulation processes in L1 and L2 writing Language Learning, 51 (3), 497–538.
Roca de Larios, J., Murphy, L., & Marín, J. (2002). A critical examination of L2 writing process research. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), S. Ransdell & M. L. Barbier (Eds.), Studies in Writing Vol. 11, New directions for research in L2 writing (pp. 11–47): Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Sanders, T., & Schilperoord, J. (2006). Text structure as a window on the cognition of writing; How text analysis provides insights in writing products and writing processes. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), The handbook of writing research (pp. 386–402). NY: Guilford Publications.
Sasaki, M. (2002). Building an empirically-based model of EFL learners’ writing processes. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), S. Ransdell & M. Barbier (Eds.), Studies in Writing Vol. 11, New directions for research in L2 Writing (pp. 49–80): Kluwer Academic Publishers.
(2004). A multiple-data analysis of the 3.5-year development of EFL student writers. Language Learning, 54 (3), 525–582.
Schoonen, R., Van Gelderen, A., De Glopper, K., Hulstijn, J., Simis, A., Snellings, P., et al. (2003). First language and second language writing: the role of linguistic knowledge, speed of processing and metacognitive knowledge. Language Learning, 53 (1), 165–202.
Shi, L. (2004). Textual borrowing in second language writing. Written Communication, 21 (2), 171–200.
Silva, T. (1993). Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing: the ESL research and its implications. TESOL Quarterly, 27 (4), 657–677.
Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis; an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modelling. London: Sage publications.
Stevenson, M. (2005). Reading and writing in a foreign language; a comparison of conceptual and linguistic processes in Dutch and English. SCO-Kohnstamm Instituut van de Faculteit der Maatschappij- en Gedragswetenschappen, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
Stevenson, M., Schoonen, R., & De Glopper, K. (2006). Revising in two languages: a multi-dimensional comparison of online writing revisions in L1 and FL. Journal of Second Language Writing, 151, 201–233.
Thorson, H. (2000). Using the computer to compare foreign and native language writing processes: a statistical and case study approach. The Modern Language Journal, 84 (ii), 155–170.
Uzawa, K. (1996). Second language learners’ processes of L1 writing, L2 writing and translation from L1 into L2. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5 (3), 271–294.
Van den Bergh, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1996). The dynamics of composing: modelling writing process data. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences & applications (pp. 207–232). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(2001). Changes in cognitive activities during the writing process and relationships with text quality. Educational Psychology, 21 (4), 373–385.
(2007). The dynamics of idea generation during writing: an online study. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), M. Torrance, L. Van Waes & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Studies in writing Vol. 20, Writing and cognition: research and applications (pp. 125–150). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Van der Hoeven, J. (1996). Children’s composing: a study of the relationships between planning and revision skill, writing processes, text quality and linguistic skills. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Studies in writing Vol. 2, Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp. 108–120). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Van Weijen, D., Van den Bergh, H., Rijlaarsdam, G., & Sanders, T. (2008a). Variation in the orchestration of cognitive activities and text quality in L1 writing. Manuscript submitted for publication.
(2008b). Composing episodes: The hierarchical structure of L1 and L2 writing Manuscript submitted for publication.
Cited by (14)
Cited by 14 other publications
Tono, Yukio
Vandermeulen, Nina, Eva Lindgren, Christian Waldmann & Maria Levlin
Leow, Ronald P. & Melissa A. Bowles
2023. Verbally mediated data. In Research Methods in the Study of L2 Writing Processes [Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 5], ► pp. 104 ff.
Valenzuela, Ángel & Ramón D. Castillo
Álvarez-Cañizo, Marta, Olivia Afonso & Paz Suárez-Coalla
Bowen, Neil Evan Jon Anthony, Nathan Thomas & Nina Vandermeulen
Choi, Ikkyu & Paul Deane
Révész, Andrea & Marije Michel
van Weijen, Daphne, Gert Rijlaarsdam & Huub van den Bergh
Barkaoui, Khaled
Barkaoui, Khaled
Van Waes, Luuk, Daphne van Weijen & Mariëlle Leijten
Tillema, Marion, Huub van den Bergh, Gert Rijlaarsdam & Ted Sanders
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.