Cover not available

In:Learning Language through Task Repetition
Edited by Martin Bygate
[Task-Based Language Teaching 11] 2018
► pp. 75–96

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

Chapter 3
The effects of task repetition and task complexity on L2 lexicon use

 | Georgia State University
 | Georgia State University
 | Georgia State University
 | University of Hawai’i at Mãnoa
 | Georgia State University
Published online: 25 September 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.11.03kim
Abstract
To date, a growing number of studies in instructed second language acquisition (SLA) have investigated the effects of task repetition on L2 performance (e.g., complexity, accuracy, fluency) as well as on the occurrence of interaction-driven learning opportunities (e.g., Bygate, 2001; Fukuta, 2016; Kim & Tracy-Ventura, 2013). However, studies have not investigated how repeating different aspects of tasks (e.g., content or procedure) during collaborative tasks affects second language lexical use. The current study aims to fill that gap by comparing the impact of procedural repetition and task repetition on the lexical use of paired language learners as they repeat collaborative tasks. Furthermore, how task complexity mediates task repetition effects was also investigated. Four intact junior high school English classes (n = 73) were randomly assigned to one of the following groups: (1) simple task with exact task repetition, (2) simple task with procedural repetition, (3) complex task with exact task repetition, and (4) complex task with procedural repetition. All groups participated in three collaborative tasks over three days. The task repetition groups carried out the same information-exchange task with the same content three times, while the procedural repetition groups followed the same task procedure but had different content for the three sessions. Learners’ interaction data during collaborative tasks were transcribed and analyzed for lexical use using a natural language processing tool. Lexical use was operationalized by word familiarity, age of acquisition (AoA), and word frequency (Kyle & Crossley, 2015). The findings indicated that as learners repeated tasks, they used words that are less familiar and have a higher age of acquisition. Task complexity was found to be a mediating factor for the relationship between task repetition and vocabulary use.
Article outline
  • The effects of task repetition and task complexity on L2 lexicon use
  • Background
    • Task repetition and L2 oral production during monologic tasks
    • Repeating different characteristics of collaborative tasks
    • Beyond task repetition effects: Mediating variables
  • Method
    • Participants
    • Materials
    • Procedure
    • Data analysis: Natural language processing tools (NLPT)
    • Statistical analysis
  • Results
    • Word familiarity
    • Word age of acquisition
    • Word frequency
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (62)
References
Ahmadian, M. J. (2013). Working memory and task repetition in second language oral production. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 23, 37–55.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ahmadian, M.J., & Tavakoli, M. (2011). The effects of simultaneous use of careful online planning and task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency in EFL learners’ oral production. Language Teaching Research, 15, 35–59.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 977–990.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bygate, M. (1996). Effects of task repetition: Appraising the developing language of learners. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 136–146). London: Heinemann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23–48). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Sources, developments and directions of task-based language teaching. The Language Learning Journal, 44, 381–400.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bygate, M., & Samuda, V. (2005). Integrative planning through the use of task repetition. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 37–74). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33, 497–505.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Cobb, T., & McNamara, D. S. (2013a). Comparing count-based and band-based indices of word frequency: Implications for active vocabulary research and pedagogical applications. System, 41, 965–981.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Feng, S., Cai, Z., & McNamara, D. S. (2013b). Computer simulations of MRC Psycholinguistics Database word properties: Concreteness, familiarity, and imageability. In S. Jarvis & M. Daller (Eds.), Vocabulary knowledge: Human ratings and automated measures (pp. 135–156). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crossley, S., & McNamara, D. (2013). Applications of text analysis tools for spoken response grading. Language Learning & Technology, 17, 171–192.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Salsbury, T., McNamara, D. S., & Jarvis, S. (2011a). What is lexical proficiency? Some answers from computational models of speech data. TESOL Quarterly, 45, 182–193.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011b). Predicting lexical proficiency in language learner texts using computational indices. Language Testing, 28, 561–580.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dobao, A. F. (2012). Collaborative dialogue in learner–learner and learner–native speaker interaction. Applied Linguistics, 33, 229–256.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2001). Non-reciprocal tasks, comprehension and second language acquisition. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain. (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 49–74). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299–323.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foster, P., Tonkyn, A., & Wigglesworth, G. (2000). Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21, 354–375.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fukuta, J. (2016). Effects of task repetition on learners’ attention orientation in L2 oral production. Language Teaching Research, 20, 321–340.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gass, S., Mackey, A., Alvarez‐Torres, M. J., & Fernández‐García, M. (1999). The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, 49, 549–581.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guo, L. Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2013). Predicting human judgments of essay quality in both integrated and independent second language writing samples: A comparison study. Writing Assessment, 18, 218–238.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haberlandt, K. F., & Graesser, A. C. (1985). Component processes in text comprehension and some of their interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 357–374.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkes, M. (2012). Using task repetition to direct learner attention and focus on form. ELT Journal, 66, 327–336.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackson, D. O., & Suethanapornkul, S. (2013). The cognition hypothesis: A synthesis and meta‐analysis of research on second language task complexity. Language Learning, 63, 330–367.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jung, Y., Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2015). Linguistic features in MELAB writing task performance (Working Paper No. 2015–05). Retrieved from Cambridge Michigan Language Assessment website: <[URL]>
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329–354.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Y. (2013). Promoting attention to form through task repetition in. In K. McDonough & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational contexts (pp. 3–24). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). The role of tasks as vehicles for learning in classroom interaction. In N. Markee (Ed.), Handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (pp. 163–181). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2011). Using pre-task modeling to encourage collaborative learning opportunities. Language Teaching Research, 15, 1–17.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Y., & Payant, C. (2014). A pedagogical proposal for task sequencing: An exploration of task repetition and task complexity on learning opportunities. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert, & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning (pp. 151–177). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Y., & Tracy-Ventura, N. (2013). The role of task repetition in L2 performance development: What needs to be repeated during task-based interaction? System, 41, 829–840.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kormos, J. (2006). Speech production and second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuperman, V., Stadthagen-Gonzales, H, & Brysbaert, M. (2012). Age-of-acquisition ratings for 30,000 English words. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 978–990.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kyle, K. & Crossley, S. A. (2015). Automatically assessing lexical sophistication: Indices, tools, findings, and application. TESOL Quarterly, 49, 757–786.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). The relationship between lexical sophistication and independent and source-based writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 34, 12–24.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lapkin, S., Swain, M., & Smith, M. (2002). Reformulation and the learning of French pronominal verbs in a Canadian French immersion context. The Modern Language Journal, 86, 485–507.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16, 307–322.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Long, M. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lynch, T., & Maclean, J. (2000). Exploring the benefits of task repetition and recycling for classroom language learning. Language Teaching Research, 4, 221–250.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lynch, T. (2007). Learning from the transcripts of an oral communication task. ELT journal, 61, 311–320.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mackey, A. (2007). Interaction as practice. In R. M. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 85–110). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McCarthy, P. M., & Jarvis, S. (2010). MTLD, vocd-D, and HD-D: A validation study of sophisticated approaches to lexical diversity assessment. Behavior research methods, 42, 381–392.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meara, P., & Bell, H. (2001). P_Lex: A simple and effective way of describing the lexical characteristics of short L2 texts. Prospect, 3, 5–19.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michel, M. C., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007). The influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch L2. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45, 241–259.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mochizuki, N., & Ortega, L. (2008). Balancing communication and grammar in beginning-level foreign language classrooms: A study of guided planning and relativization. Language Teaching Research, 12, 11–37.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nation, P. (2005). Second language vocabulary. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (Vol. 14, pp. 413–448). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Patanasorn, C. (2010). Effects of procedural, content, and task repetition on accuracy and fluency in an EFL context (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 169–190.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Kim, Y. (2016). Task-based learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 73–97.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rayner, K, & Pollatsek, A. (1994). The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on L2 speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45, 193–213.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Salsbury, T., Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2011). Psycholinguistic word information in second language oral discourse. Second Language Research, 27, 343–360.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2009a). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30, 510–532.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009b). Models of speaking and the assessment of second language proficiency. In A. Benati (Ed.), Issues in second language proficiency (pp. 203–215). London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Limited attentional capacity, second language performance, and task-based pedagogy. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 211–260). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The cModern Language Journal, 82, 320–337.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van den Branden, K., Bygate, M., & Norris, J. M. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Introducing the reader. In K. Van den Branden, M. Bygate & J. M. Norris (Eds.), Task-based language teaching: A reader (pp. 1–13). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vermeer, A. (2000). Coming to grips with lexical richness in spontaneous speech data. Language Testing, 17, 65–83.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yu, G. (2009). Lexical diversity in writing and speaking task performances. Applied Linguistics, 31, 236–259.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zipf, G. K. (1935). The psycho-biology of language. New York, NY: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (16)

Cited by 16 other publications

Fullana, Natalia, Ingrid Mora-Plaza, Joan C. Mora, Miren Adrian & Gisela Sosa-López
2025. Task complexity effects on L2 speech rhythm in spontaneous speech production. Second Language Research 41:4 ► pp. 621 ff. DOI logo
Róg, Tomasz
2025. The Notion and Scope of Task-Based Language Teaching. In Task-based Language Teaching and Beyond: L2 Pragmatics Instruction for Young Learners [Second Language Learning and Teaching, ], ► pp. 65 ff. DOI logo
Róg, Tomasz
2025. The interaction between task repetition and oral task enjoyment: Effects on speech complexity, accuracy, and fluency. Language Teaching ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Yu, Qiaona
2025. Chinese Syntactic Complexity and Task Effects. In Defining and Assessing Chinese Syntactic Complexity via TC-Units [Frontiers in Chinese Linguistics, 13], ► pp. 53 ff. DOI logo
Abdi Tabari, Mahmoud, Phil Hiver & Reza Norouzian
2024. Interactions between task complexity, task repetition, and task motivation in L2 writing. Language Teaching Research DOI logo
Abdi Tabari, Mahmoud, Sima Khezrlou & Yu Tian
2024. Verb argument construction complexity indices and L2 written production: effects of task complexity and task repetition. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 18:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Tabari, Mahmoud Abdi, Sima Khezrlou & Yu Tian
2024. Task complexity, task repetition, and L2 writing complexity: exploring interactions in the TBLT domain. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 62:2 ► pp. 871 ff. DOI logo
Róg, Tomasz & Marek Krawiec
2024. Task repetition and L2 grit. TASK. Journal on Task-Based Language Teaching and Learning 4:2 ► pp. 241 ff. DOI logo
Tabari, Mahmoud Abdi, Sima Khezrlou & Hessameddin Ghanbar
2024. Task repetition versus task rehearsal: Understanding effects of task-readiness factors and elemental genres on L2 writing task performance. Language Teaching Research DOI logo
Duong, Phuong-Thao, Maribel Montero Perez, Long-Quoc Nguyen, Piet Desmet & Elke Peters
2023. The impact of input, input repetition, and task repetition on L2 lexical use and fluency in speaking. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 13:1 ► pp. 101 ff. DOI logo
Santos, Sara
2023. Efeitos da repetição procedimental e da complexidade cognitiva da tarefa no desempenho oral em português língua estrangeira: estudo exploratório . Diacrítica 36:2 ► pp. 9 ff. DOI logo
Wouters, Isabelle, Nina Woll & Pierre-Luc Paquet
2023. Modelling plurilingual instruction through a crosslinguistic-communicative task sequence. TASK. Journal on Task-Based Language Teaching and Learning 3:1 ► pp. 28 ff. DOI logo
Sánchez, Alberto J., Rosa M. Manchón & Roger Gilabert
2020. The effects of task repetition across modalities and proficiency levels. In Writing and Language Learning [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 56], ► pp. 121 ff. DOI logo
Khezrlou, Sima
2019. Task Repetition and Corrective Feedback: The Role of Feedback Types and Structure Saliency. English Teaching & Learning 43:2 ► pp. 213 ff. DOI logo
Khezrlou, Sima
2021. Explicit instruction through task repetition: effects on explicit and implicit knowledge development. Language Awareness 30:1 ► pp. 62 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2025. Second Language Cognitive Task Complexity [Task-Based Language Teaching, 18], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 december 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