Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Second Language Pronunciation
Vol. 7:1 (2021) ► pp.89–115

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Maximizing the effect of visual feedback for pronunciation instruction

A comparative analysis of three approaches

ORCiD logo with link | Purdue University
 | Davidson College
Published online: 1 October 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.20005.ols
Abstract
Visual feedback, in which learners visually analyze acoustic speech characteristics, has been shown to significantly improve pronunciation, but extant research has varied widely with respect to the target feature, length of the intervention, and type of intervention. This study presents a comparative analysis of three methods of visual feedback for L2 segmental pronunciation instruction. These methods, all focused on training voice onset time for English-speaking learners of Spanish, differed in duration of instruction (i.e., short and long) and the nature of each intervention (i.e., phonemes presented simultaneously or sequentially). Results show that while all forms of visual feedback significantly improve L2 Spanish pronunciation, evidenced by a reduction in voice onset time, the greatest improvement was found following both longer treatments and a sequential approach. Theoretical and pedagogical implications are discussed.
Article outline
  • 1.Literature review
    • 1.1Trends in pronunciation instruction
    • 1.2Visual feedback in pronunciation instruction and learning
    • 1.3Voice onset time in English and Spanish
    • 1.4Research questions
  • 2.Methodology
    • 2.1Method 1: Short visual feedback
      • 2.1.1Participants
      • 2.1.2Stimuli
      • 2.1.3Procedure
    • 2.2Method 2: Long simultaneous visual feedback
      • 2.2.1Participants
      • 2.2.2Stimuli
      • 2.2.3Procedure
    • 2.3Method 3: Long sequential visual feedback
      • 2.3.1Participants
      • 2.3.2Stimuli
      • 2.3.3Procedure
    • 2.4Summary of key methodological differences
    • 2.5Data analysis
      • 2.5.1Words in novel utterances
      • 2.5.2Words in isolation
      • 2.5.3Voice onset time
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Words in utterances
    • 3.2Words in isolation
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (60)
References
Akahane-Yamada, R., McDermott, E., Adachi, T., Kawahara, H., & Pruitt, J. S. (1998). Computer-based second language production training by using spectrographic representation and HMM-based speech recognition scores. In Fifth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (pp. 1–4). [URL]
Anderson-Hseih, J. (1992). Using electronic visual feedback to teach suprasegmentals. System, 201, 51–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Auer, E. T., Bernstein, L. E., & Tucker, P. E. (2000). Is subjective word familiarity a meter of ambient language? A natural experiment on effects of perceptual experience. Memory & Cognition, 28(5), 789–797. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1-7 [URL]
Barr, D., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 681, 255–278. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D. (2007). Nonnative and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. In M. Munro & O. S. Bohn (Eds.), Second language speech learning: The role of language experience in speech perception and production (pp. 13–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2018). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (version 6.0.42) [computer software]. Available from [URL]
Bradlow, A. R., Pisoni, D. B., Akahane-Yamada, R., & Tohkura, Y. I. (1997). Training Japanese listeners to identify English/r/and/l: IV. Some effects of perceptual learning on speech production. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101(4), 2299–2310. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carey, M. (2004). CALL Visual feedback for pronunciation of vowels: Kay Sona-Match. CALICO Journal, 21(3), 571–601. [URL]
Cho, T., & Ladefoged, P. (1999). Variation and universals in VOT: Evidence from 18 languages. Journal of Phonetics, 271, 207–229. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chun, D. (1989). Teaching tone with microcomputers. CALICO Journal, 7(1), 21–47. [URL]
(1998). Signal analysis software for teaching discourse intonation. Language Learning & Technology, 2(1), 61–77. [URL]
(2007). Come ride the wave: But where is it taking us? CALICO Journal, 24(2), 239–252. [URL]
de Bot, K. (1980). Evaluation of intonation acquisition: A comparison of methods. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 71, 81–92.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1983). Visual feedback of intonation: Effectiveness and induced practice behavior. Language and Speech, 261, 331–350. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Jong, K. J., Hao, Y., & Park, H. (2009). Evidence for featural units in the acquisition of speech production skills: Linguistic structure in foreign accent. Journal of Phonetics, 371, 357–373. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Derwing, T., & Munro, M. (2005). Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: a research-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 391, 379–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Derwing, T., Munro, M., & Wiebe, G. (1998). Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation instruction. Language Learning, 48(3), 393–410. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fischer, L. B. (1986). The use of audio/visual aids in the teaching and learning of French. Pine Brook, NJ: Kay Elemetrics Corporation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1995). Second language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 233–276). Baltimore: York Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., & Wang, C. (1989). Native-language phonotactic constraints affect how well Chinese subjects perceive the word-final /t/–/d/ contrast. Journal of Phonetics, 171, 299–315. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garcia, C., Kolat, M. & Morgan, T. (2018). Self-correction of second language pronunciation via online, real-time, visual feedback. In J. Levis (Ed.), Proceedings of the 9th Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference (pp. 54–65). Ames, IA: Iowa State University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hardison, D. (2004). Generalization of computer assisted prosody training: Quantitative and qualitative findings. Language Learning and Technology, 8(1), 34–52.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kartushina, N., Hervais-Adelman, A., Frauenfelder, U. H., & Golestani, N. (2015). The effect of phonetic production training with visual feedback on the perception and production of foreign speech sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1381, 817–832. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambacher, S. (1999). A CALL tool for improving second language acquisition of English consonants by Japanese learners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12(2), 137–156. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, J., Jang, J., & Plonsky, L. (2015). The effectiveness of second language pronunciation instruction: A meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 345–366. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, J. F., & VanPatten, B. (1995). Making communicative language teaching happen. Volume 1: Directions for language learning and teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Léon, P., & Martin, P. (1972). Applied linguistics and the teaching of intonation. The Modern Language Journal, 56(3), 139–144. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levis, J. (2005). Changing contexts and shifting paradigms in pronunciation teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3), 369–377. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Computer technology in teaching and researching pronunciation. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 271, 184–202. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levis, J., & Pickering, L. (2004). Teaching intonation in discourse using speech visualization technology. System, 321, 505–524. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S. (1964). A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word, 20(3), 384–422. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lord, G. (2005). (How) can we teach foreign language pronunciation? On the effects of a Spanish phonetics course. Hispania, 88(3), 557–567. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McBride, K. (2015). Which features of Spanish learner’s pronunciation most impact listener evaluations? Hispania 98(1), 14–30. [URL]
Moholt, G. (1988). Computer assisted instruction in pronunciation for Chinese speakers of American English. TESOL Quarterly 22(1), 91–111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Motohashi-Saigo, M., & Hardison, D. (2009). Acquisition of L2 Japanese geminates training with waveform displays. Language Learning & Technology, 13(2), 29–47. [URL]
Munro, M. J. (2016). Pronunciation learning and teaching: What can phonetics research tell us. In the Proceedings of the International Symposium on Applied Phonetics (p. 26–29). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Munro, M.J., & Derwing, T. (1995). Foreign accent, comprehensibility and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 451, 73–97. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning 50(3), 417–528. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Okuno, T. (2013). Acquisition of L2 vowel duration in Japanese by native English speakers. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Offerman, H. M. (2020). (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Effects of pronunciation instruction on L2 learner production and perception in Spanish: A comparative analysis. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Offerman, H. M., & Olson, D. J. (2016). Visual feedback and second language segmental production: The generalizability of pronunciation gains. System, 591, 45–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Olson, D. J. (2014a). Phonetics and technology in the classroom: A practical approach to using speech analysis software in second-language pronunciation instruction. Hispania, 97(1), 47–68. [URL].
(2014b). Benefits of visual feedback on segmental production in the L2 classroom. Language Learning and Technology, 18(3), 173–192. [URL]
(2019). Feature acquisition in second language phonetic development: Evidence from phonetic training. Language Learning, 69(2), 366–404. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(Under review). Considering the scope of phonetic features in second language acquisition.
Plonsky, L., & Brown, D. (2015). Domain definition and search techniques in meta-analyses of L2 research (Or why 18 meta-analyses of feedback have different results). Second Language Research, 31(2), 267–278. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F. (2014). How big is “big” Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [URL]
Revelle, W. (2018). psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research. R package version 1.8.4. [URL]
Ruellot, V. (2011). Computer-assisted pronunciation learning of French /u/ and /y/ at the intermediate level. In J. Levis & K. LeVelle (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference (pp. 199–213). Ames, IA: Iowa State University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saito, K. (2007). The influence of explicit phonetic instruction on pronunciation teaching in EFL settings: The case of English vowels and Japanese learners of English. The Linguistics Journal, 3(3), 16–40.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–159. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. W. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1–63). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spaai, G. W., & Hermes, D. J. (1993). A visual display for the teaching of intonation. Calico Journal 10(3), 19–30. [URL]
Sturm, J., Miyamoto, M., & Suzuki, N. (2019). Pronunciation in the L2 French classroom: Student and teacher attitudes. The French Review, 92(3), 60–78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thomson, R. I., & Derwing, T. M. (2015). The effectiveness of L2 pronunciation instruction: A narrative review. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 326–344. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tyler, M. (2019). PAM-L2 and phonological category acquisition in the foreign language classroom. In A. M. Nyvad, M. Hejná, A. Højen, A. B. Jespersen, & M. Hjortshøj Sørensen (Eds.) A sound approach to language matters – In honor of Ocke-Schwen Bohn (pp. 607–630). Department of English, School of Communication & Culture, Aarhus University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (16)

Cited by 16 other publications

Hirschi, Kevin, Okim Kang, Mu Yang, John H. L. Hansen & Kyle Beloin
2025. Artificial Intelligence‐Generated Feedback for Second Language Intelligibility: An Exploratory Intervention Study on Effects and Perceptions. Language Learning 75:S1 ► pp. 204 ff. DOI logo
Casserly, Elizabeth D. & Francesca R. Marino
2024. Mirrors and toothaches: commonplace manipulations of non-auditory feedback availability change perceived speech intelligibility. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 18 DOI logo
Dmitrieva, Olga
2024. The Phonetics and Phonology of Adult L2 Learners in the Classroom. In The Cambridge Handbook of Bilingual Phonetics and Phonology, ► pp. 521 ff. DOI logo
Levis, John M.
2024. Key issues in L2 pronunciation research. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation 10:3 ► pp. 293 ff. DOI logo
Levis, John M. & Charlie Nagle
2024. Bridging the Gap between Bilingual Phonetic Research and Pronunciation Teaching. In The Cambridge Handbook of Bilingual Phonetics and Phonology, ► pp. 791 ff. DOI logo
Lu, Ai-Ling & Danjie Su
2024. Shadowing textbook and authentic materials in beginning L2 learners’ acquisition of Mandarin Chinese tones in spontaneous speech. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation 10:1 ► pp. 59 ff. DOI logo
Mahmood, Rizgar Qasim
2024. The Impact of Visual Corrective Feedback on Pronunciation Accuracy in L2 Sound Production. In Exploring Contemporary English Language Education Practices [Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design, ], ► pp. 158 ff. DOI logo
Nagle, Charlie & Phil Hiver
2024. Optimizing second language pronunciation instruction: Replications of Martin and Sippel (2021), Olson and Offerman (2021), and Thomson (2012). Language Teaching 57:3 ► pp. 419 ff. DOI logo
Nagle, Charlie L., Amanda Huensch & Germán Zárate–Sández
2023. Exploring phonetic predictors of intelligibility, comprehensibility, and foreign accent in L2 Spanish speech. The Modern Language Journal 107:1 ► pp. 202 ff. DOI logo
Stratton, James M.
2023. Explicit pronunciation instruction in the second language classroom. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation 9:1 ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo
Zhou, Alexis & Daniel J. Olson
2023. Quantitative Methods for Analyzing Second Language Lexical Tone Production. Languages 8:3 ► pp. 209 ff. DOI logo
Chun, Dorothy M. & Yan Jiang
2022. Using Technology to Explore L2 Pronunciation. In Second Language Pronunciation, ► pp. 129 ff. DOI logo
Levis, John M. & Zoë Zawadzki
2022. New directions in pronunciation research. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation 8:3 ► pp. 319 ff. DOI logo
Martin, Ines A. & Solène Inceoglu
2022. The Laboratory, the Classroom, and Online. In Second Language Pronunciation, ► pp. 254 ff. DOI logo
Bogach, Natalia, Elena Boitsova, Sergey Chernonog, Anton Lamtev, Maria Lesnichaya, Iurii Lezhenin, Andrey Novopashenny, Roman Svechnikov, Daria Tsikach, Konstantin Vasiliev, Evgeny Pyshkin & John Blake
2021. Speech Processing for Language Learning: A Practical Approach to Computer-Assisted Pronunciation Teaching. Electronics 10:3 ► pp. 235 ff. DOI logo
O’Brien, Mary Grantham
2021. Ease and Difficulty in L2 Pronunciation Teaching: A Mini-Review. Frontiers in Communication 5 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue