In:Second Language Cognitive Task Complexity: A research synthesis
Shoko Sasayama, Aleksandra Malicka and John M. Norris
[Task-Based Language Teaching 18] 2025
► pp. 259–290
References
Published online: 26 June 2025
https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.18.refs
https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.18.refs
**Abdi Tabari, M. (2016). The
effects of planning time on complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexical variety in L2 descriptive
writing. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language
Education, 1(10), 1–15.
**Abdi Tabari, M. (2017). Investigating
the effects of planning time on the complexity of L2 argumentative
writing. TESL-EJ, 21(1), 1–24.
**Abdi Tabari, M., Eslami, H., & Zahedi, Y. (2012). The
impact of pre-task planning on the fluency and accuracy of Iranian EFL learners’ oral
performance. Procedia, 69, 2281–2288.
Abdi Tabari, M., Khezrlou, S., & Tian, Y. (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), 1–16.
**Abrams, Z. I., & Byrd, D. R. (2016). The
effects of pre-task planning on L2 writing: Mind-mapping and chronological sequencing in a 1st-year German
class. System, 63, 1–12.
*Adams, R., & Alwi, N. (2014). Prior
knowledge and second language task production in text chat. In M. González-Lloret & L. Ortega (Eds.), Technology-mediated
TBLT: Researching technology and
tasks (pp. 51–78). John Benjamins.
*Adams, R., Alwi, N., & Newton, J. (2015). Task
complexity effects on the complexity and accuracy of writing via text chat. Journal of Second
Language
Writing, 29, 64–81.
Ahmadian, M. J., & Long, M. (Eds.). (2021). The
Cambridge handbook of task-based language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
**Ahangari, S., & Abdi Tabari, M. (2011). The
effect of pre-task planning on the accuracy and complexity of Iranian EFL learners’ oral
performance. Procedia, 29, 1950–1959.
**Ahmadian, M. J. (2012). The
effects of guided careful online planning on complexity, accuracy and fluency in intermediate EFL learners’ oral production:
The case of English articles. Language Teaching
Research, 16(1), 129–149.
**Ahmadian, M. J. (2013). Working
memory and task repetition in second language oral production. Asian Journal of English
Language
Teaching, 23, 37–55.
*Ahmadian, M. J. (2011). The
effect of “massed” task repetitions on complexity, accuracy and fluency: Does it transfer to a new
task? The Language Learning
Journal, 39(3), 269–280.
*Ahmadian, M. J., Abdolrezapour, P., & Ketabi, S. (2012). Task
difficulty and self-repair behavior in second language oral production. International Journal
of Applied
Linguistics, 22(3), 310–330.
**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(1), 35–59.
**Ahmadian, M. J., & Tavakoli, M. (2014). Investigating
what second language learners do and monitor under careful online planning conditions. The
Canadian Modern Language
Review, 70(1), 50–75.
**Ahmadian, M. J., Tavakoli, M., & Vahid Dastjerdi, H. (2015). The
combined effects of online planning and task structure on complexity, accuracy and fluency of L2
speech. The Language Learning
Journal, 43(1), 41–56.
Aiken, L. R. (1982). Writing
multiple-choice items to measure higher-order educational objectives. Educational and
Psychological
Measurement, 42, 803–806.
Akbulut, Y. (2008). Predictors
of foreign language reading comprehension in a hypermedia reading environment. Journal of
Educational Computing
Research, 39(1), 37–50.
*Al-Shehri, S., & Gitsaki, C. (2010). Online
reading: A preliminary study of the impact of integrated and split-attention formats on L2 students’ cognitive
load. ReCALL, 22(3), 356–375.
**Albert, A. (2011). When
individual differences come into play: The effect of learner creativity on simple and complex task
performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second
language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and
performance (pp. 239–266). John Benjamins.
*Alidoost, Y., Tabatabaei, S., & Bakhtiarvand, M. (2014). The
effect of picture story in creating textual coherence in narrative genre. Theory and Practice
in Language
Studies, 4(2), 359–365.
**Alptekin, C. (2006). Cultural
familiarity in inferential and literal comprehension in L2
reading. System, 34(4), 494–508.
*Alptekin, C., & Erçetin, G. (2009). Assessing
the relationship of working memory to L2 reading: Does the nature of comprehension process and reading span task make a
difference? System, 37(4), 627–639.
**Alwi, N., Adams, R., & Newton, J. (2012). Writing
to learn via text chat: Task implementation and focus on form. Journal of Second Language
Writing, 21(1), 23–39.
**Amiryousefi, M. (2016). The
differential effects of two types of task repetition on the complexity, accuracy, and fluency in computer-mediated L2 written
production: A focus on computer anxiety. Computer Assisted Language
Learning, 29(5), 1050–1066.
**Amiryousefi, M. (2017). Effects
of task complexity increase on computer-mediated L2 writing and temporal distribution of cognitive and metacognitive
processes. Journal of Research in Applied
Linguistics, 8(2), 187–210.
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A
taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives. Longman.
Andringa, S., & Godfroid, A. (2020). Sampling
bias and the problem of generalizability in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 40, 134–142.
**Aubrey, S. (2018). The
impact of intra-cultural and inter-cultural task repetition on
interaction. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Learning
language through task
repetition (pp. 117–142). John Benjamins.
Ausubel, D. P. (1977). The
facilitation of meaningful verbal learning in the classroom. Educational
Psychologist, 12(2), 162–178.
**Awwad, A., & Tavakoli, P. (2019). Task
complexity, language proficiency and working memory: Interaction effects on second language speech
performance. IRAL, 60(2), 169–196.
**Awwad, A., Tavakoli, P., & Wright, C. (2017). “I
think that’s what he’s doing”: Effects of intentional reasoning on second language (L2) speech
performance. System, 67, 158–169.
*Aydin, Z., & Yildiz, S. (2014). Using
wikis to promote collaborative EFL writing. Language Learning &
Technology, 18(1), 160–180.
Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2012). The
split-attention principle in multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), The
Cambridge handbook of multimedia
learning (pp. 135–146). Cambridge University Press.
*Azkarai, A., & Oliver, R. (2019). Negative
feedback on task repetition: ESL vs. EFL child settings. The Language Learning
Journal, 47(3), 269–280.
Babaii, E., & Moghaddam, M. J. (2006). On
the interplay between test task difficulty and macro-level processing in the
C-test. System, 34(4), 586–600.
Baddeley, A. D. (2000). The
episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive
Sciences, 4, 417–23.
Baddeley, A. D. (2003). Working
memory and language: An overview. Journal of Communication
Disorders, 36, 189–208.
Baddeley, A. D. (2012). Working
memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of
Psychology, 63, 1–29.
**Bagheri, M., & Hamrang, A. (2013). The
impact of planning on accuracy and complexity in oral production of male and female English as a foreign language (EFL)
learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English
Literature, 2(2), 25–32.
*Baleghizadeh, S., & Shahri, M. N. N. (2013). The
effect of online planning, strategic planning and rehearsal across two proficiency levels. The
Language Learning
Journal, 45(2), 171–184.
**Baralt, M. (2013). The
impact of cognitive complexity on feedback efficacy during online versus face-to-face interactive
tasks. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 35(4), 689–725.
*Baralt, M. (2014). Task
complexity and task sequencing in traditional versus online language
classes. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert, & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task
sequencing and instructed second language
learning (pp. 95–122). Bloomsbury.
**Baralt, M. (2015). Working
memory capacity, cognitive complexity and L2 recasts in online language
teaching. In Z. Wen, M. B. Mota, A. McNeill, M. Bunting & R. Engle (Eds.), Working
memory in second language acquisition and
processing (pp. 248–269). Multilingual Matters.
Baralt, M., Gilabert, R., & Robinson, P. (2014). Task
sequencing and instructed second language
learning. Bloomsbury.
Baralt, M., & Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2011). Comparing
learners’ state anxiety during task-based interaction in computer-mediated and face-to-face
communication. Language Teaching
Research, 15(2), 201–229.
*Baralt, M., Gurzynski-Weiss, L., & Kim, Y. (2016). Engagement
with the language: How examining learners’ affective and social engagement explains successful learner-generated attention to
form. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer
interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research
agenda (pp. 209–239). John Benjamins.
**Baralt, M. & Leow, R. (2015). Uptake,
task complexity, and L2 development in SLA: An online
perspective. In R. Leow, L. Cerezo, & M. Baralt (Eds.), A
psycholinguistic approach to technology and language
learning (pp. 199–218). De Gruyter Mouton.
*Barry, S., & Lazarte, A. A. (1995). Embedded
clause effects on recall: Does high prior knowledge of content domain overcome syntactic complexity in students’
Spanish? The Modern Language
Journal, 79(4), 491–504.
*Barry, S., & Lazarte, A. A. (1998). Evidence
for mental models: How do prior knowledge, syntactic complexity and reading topic affect inference generation in a recall task
for nonnative readers of Spanish? The Modern Language
Journal, 82(2), 176–193.
Beauvais, C., Olive, T., & Passerault, J.-M. (2011). Why
are some texts good and others not? Relationship between text quality and management of the writing
processes. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 103(2), 415–428.
Benevides, M., & Valvona, C. (2018). Widgets
inc.: A task-based course in practical English (2nd ed.). Atama-ii Books.
*Ben Maad, M. R. (2012). Researching
task difficulty from an individual differences perspective: The case of goal
orientation. Australian Review of Applied
Linguistics, 35(1), 28–47.
*Ben Maad, M. R. (2016). The
role of L2 learner goal differences in task-generated oral production. Australian Review of
Applied
Linguistics, 39(1), 47–71.
Biber, D., Larsson, T., & Hancock, G. R. (2024). The
linguistic organization of grammatical text complexity: Comparing the empirical adequacy of theory-based
models. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic
Theory, 20(2), 347–373.
Biber, D., Gray, B., & Poonpon, K. (2011). Should
we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing
development? TESOL
Quarterly, 45(1), 5–35.
*Biber, D., Gray, B., & Staples, S. (2016). Predicting
patterns of grammatical complexity across language exam task types and proficiency
levels. Applied
Linguistics, 37(5), 639–668.
**Birdjandi, P., & Ahangari, S. (2008). Effects
of task repetition on the fluency, complexity and accuracy of Iranian EFL learners’ oral
discourse. Asian EFL
Journal, 10(3), 28–52.
**Biria, R., & Karimi, Z. (2015). The
effects of pre-task planning on the writing fluency of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of
Language Teaching and
Research, 6(2), 357–365.
Bloom, B., Englehart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy
of Educational Objectives: The classification of educational goals, Handbook I: Cognitive
domain. David McKay.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. (2022). Comprehensive
Meta-Analysis Version 4. Biostat.
*Borrás, I., & Lafayette, R. C. (1994). Effects
of multimedia courseware subtitling on the speaking performance of college students of
French. The Modern Language
Journal, 78(1), 61–75.
Brünken, R., Plaas, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct
measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational
Psychologist, 38, 53–61.
Brünken, R., Steinbacher, S., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2002). Assessment
of cognitive load in multimedia learning using dual-task methodology. Experimental
Psychology, 49, 109–119.
Bryfonski, L., Ku, Y., & Mackey, A. (2024). Research
methods for IDs and TBLT: A substantive and methodological review. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 46, 617–643.
Bryfonski, L., & McKay, T. H. (2019). TBLT
implementation and evaluation: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching
Research, 23(5), 603–632.
**Bui, G. H. Y. (2014). Task
readiness: Theoretical framework and empirical evidence from topic familiarity, strategic planning, and proficiency
levels. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing
perspectives on task
performance (pp. 63–94). John Benjamins.
**Bui, G. (2021[2019]). Influence
of learners’ prior knowledge, L2 proficiency and pre-task planning on L2 lexical
complexity. IRAL, 59(4), 543–567.
**Bui, G., & Huang, Z. (2018). L2
fluency as influenced by content familiarity and planning: Performance, measurement, and
pedagogy. Language Teaching
Research, 22(1), 94–114.
**Bui, G., Ahmadian, M. J., & Hunter, A.-M. (2019). Spacing
effects on repeated L2 task
performance. System, 81, 1–13.
Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2012). Defining
and operationalising L2 complexity. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions
of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in
SLA (pp. 21–46). John Benjamins.
Bulté, B., Housen, A., & Pallotti, G. (2024). Complexity
and difficulty in second language acquisition: A theoretical and methodological
overview. Language Learning.
Butler, R. J., Pray, T. F., & Strang, D. R. (1979). An
extension of Wolfe’s study of simulation game complexity. Decision
Sciences, 10(3), 480–486.
Bygate, M. (1999). Quality
of language and purpose of task: Patterns of learners’ language on two oral communication
tasks. Language Teaching
Research, 3, 185–214.
*Bygate, M. (2001). Effects
of task repetition on the structure and control of language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching
pedagogic tasks: Second language learning and
testing (pp. 23–48). Longman.
Bygate, M. (2018). Learning
language through task repetition. John Benjamins.
*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). John Benjamins.
Byrnes, H., Maxim, H. H., & Norris, J. M. (2010). Realizing
advanced foreign language writing development in collegiate education: Curricular design, pedagogy,
assessment. The Modern Language
Journal, 94(supplement), i–235.
Campbell, D. I., & Gingrich, K. (1986). The
interactive effects of task complexity and participation on task performance: A field
experiment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 38, 162–180.
Candlin, C. N. (1987). Towards
task-based language learning. In C. N. Candlin & D. Murphy (Eds.), Lancaster
practical papers in English language education: Vol. 7. Language learning
tasks (pp. 5–22). Prentice Hall.
*Carver, J., & Kim, Y. (2020). French
learners’ past-tense development through collaborative writing tasks: The role of procedural and content
repetition. The Canadian Modern Language
Review, 76(2), 114–138.
Causer, J. (2014). Professional
expertise in medicine. In P. Lanzer (Ed.), PanVascular
medicine (2nd
ed., pp. 4763–4776). Springer.
**Chang, C. C., Lei, H., & Tseng, J-S. (2011). Media
presentation mode, English listening comprehension and cognitive load in ubiquitous learning environments: Modality effect or
redundancy effect? Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 27(4), 633–654.
*Chen, C., & Huang, K. (2014). The
effects of response modes and cues on language learning, cognitive load and self-efficacy beliefs in web-based
learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and
Hypermedia, 23(2), 117–134.
Chen, I. J., & Chang, C. C. (2009). Cognitive
Load Theory: An empirical study of anxiety and task performance in language
learning. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational
Psychology, 7(2), 729–746.
**Chen, I. J., & Chang, C. C. (2011). Content
presentation modes in mobile language listening tasks: English proficiency as a
moderator. Computer Assisted Language
Learning, 24(5), 451–470.
Chen, N. S., Hsieh, S. W., & Kinshuk. (2008). Effects
of short-term memory and content representation type on mobile language learning. Language
Learning &
Technology, 12, 93–113.
*Chen, Q., & Donin, J. (1997). Discourse
processing of first and second language biology texts: Effects of language proficiency and domain-specific
knowledge. The Modern Language
Journal, 81(2), 209–227.
Cheung, M. W. L. (2019). A
guide to conducting a meta-analysis with non-independent effect sizes. Neuropsychology
Review, 29(4), 387–396.
*Cho, H. (2015). Effects
of task complexity on English argumentative writing. English
Teaching, 70(2), 107–131.
**Cho, M. (2018). Task
complexity, modality, and working memory in L2 task
performance. System, 72, 85–98.
Chong, S. W., & Plonsky, L. (2024). A
typology of secondary research in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics
Review, 15(4), 1569–1594.
**Choong, P. K. (2011). Task
complexity and linguistic complexity: An exploratory study. Studies in Applied Linguistics
&
TESOL, 11(1), 1–28.
Cochrane Collaboration (n. d.). About
Cochrane reviews. Web page. [URL]
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical
power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cohen, K. J., & Rhenman, E. (1961). The
role of management games in education and research. Management
Science, 7(2), 153–158.
Cooper, L. V., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (Eds.). (2009). The
handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed.). Russell Sage Foundation.
Coughlan, P., & Duff, P. (1994). Same
task, different activities: Analysis of a SLA task from an Activity Theory
perspective. In J. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian
perspectives on second language
research (pp. 173–193). Ablex.
Cromer, R. (1973). The
development of language and cognition: The cognition
hypothesis. In B. Foss (Ed.), New
perspectives in child
development (pp. 184–252). Penguin.
**Crookes, G. (1989). Planning
and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 11(4), 367–383.
Crossley, S., Salsbury, T., & McNamara, D. (2009). Measuring
L2 lexical growth using hypernymic relationships. Language
Learning, 59(2), 307–234.
*Cumming, A., Kantor, R., Baba, K., Erdosy, U., Eouanzoui, K. et al. (2005). Differences
in written discourse in independent and integrated prototype tasks for next generation
TOEFL. Assessing
Writing, 10(1), 5–43.
**Dawadi, S. (2019a). Effects
of task repetition on EFL oral performance. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics, 170(1), 3–23.
*D’Ely, R., Borges Mota, M., & Bygate, M. (2019). Strategic
planning and repetition as metacognitive processes in task performance: Implications for EFL learners’ speech
production. In Z. Wen & M. J. Ahmadian (Eds.), Researching
L2 task performance and pedagogy: In honour of Peter
Skehan (pp. 199–228). John Benjamins.
**Diao, Y., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2007). The
effect of written text on comprehension of spoken English as a foreign language. The American
Journal of
Psychology, 120(2), 237–261.
**Diao, Y., & Sweller, J. (2007). Redundancy
in foreign language reading comprehension instruction: Concurrent written and spoken
presentations. Learning and
Instruction, 17(1), 78–88.
Djiwandono, P. I. (2011). Applying
consciousness-raising method to a writing class. Sino-US English
Teaching, 8(10), 659–664.
*Djapoura, A. (2005). The
effect of pre-task planning time on task-based performance. In C. Edwards & J. Willis (Eds.), Teachers
exploring tasks in English language
teaching (pp. 214–227). Palgrave Macmillan.
Earley, P. C. (1985). Influence
of information, choice and task complexity upon goal acceptance, performance, and personal
goals. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 70, 481–491.
Ekiert, M., Révész, A., Torgersen, E., Moss, E. (2022). The
role of pausing in L2 oral task performance: Toward a complete construct of functional
adequacy. TASK, 2(1), 33–59.
**Elder, C. & Iwashita, N. (2005). Planning
for test performance: Does it make a difference? In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning
and task performance in a second
language (pp. 219–238). John Benjamins.
*Elder, C., Iwashita, N., & McNamara, T. (2002). Estimating
the difficulty of oral proficiency tasks: What does the test-taker have to offer? Language
Testing, 19(4), 347–368.
Ellis, R. (1987). Interlanguage
variability in narrative discourse: Style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in
Second Language
Acquisition, 9, 1–20.
Ellis, R. (2005). Planning
and task performance in a second language. John Benjamins.
Ellis, R. (2009). The
differential effects of three types of task planning on the fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 oral
production. Applied
Linguistics, 30(4), 474–509.
Ellis, R. (2013, March). Meta-analysis
or mega-silliness? Re-visiting Eysenck’s critique for SLA. Paper presented at
the conference of the American Association for Applied Linguistics
(AAAL), Dallas, TX.
Ellis, R. (2018). Meta-analysis
in second language acquisition research: A critical appraisal. Journal of Second Language
Studies, 1, 231–253.
**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 R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning
and task performance in a second
language (pp. 167–192). John Benjamins.
**Farahani, A. A. K., & Meraji, S. R. (2011). Cognitive
task complexity and L2 narrative writing performance. Journal of Language Teaching and
Research, 2(2), 445–456.
**Fazilatfar, A. M., Kasiri, F., & Nowbakht, M. (2020). The
comparative effects of planning time and task conditions on the complexity, accuracy and fluency of L2 writing by EFL
learners. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching
Research, 8(1), 93–110.
*Finardi, K. (2008a). Effects
of task repetition on L2 oral performance. Trabalhos em Linguística
Aplicada, 47(1), 31–43.
*Finardi, K. (2008b). Working
memory and speech performance in a picture description task with repetition. Cadernos de
Estudos
Linguísticos, 50(2), 135–147.
*Foster, P. (1996). Doing
the task better: How planning time influences students’
performance. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge
and change in language
teaching (pp. 126–135). MacMillan Heinemann.
Foster, P. (1998). A
classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied
Linguistics, 19(1), 1–23.
*Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The
influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 18(3), 299–323.
*Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1999). The
influence of source of planning and focus of planning on task-based performance. Language
Teaching
Research, 3(3), 215–247.
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (2013). Anticipating
a post-task activity: The effects on accuracy, complexity, and fluency of second language
performance. The Canadian Modern Language
Review, 69(3), 249–273.
Foster, P., & Tavakoli, P. (2009). Native
speakers and task performance: Comparing effects on complexity, fluency, and lexical
diversity. Language
Learning, 59(4), 866–896.
*Fraser, C. A. (2007). Reading
rate in L1 Mandarin Chinese and L2 English across five reading tasks. The Modern Language
Journal, 91, 372–394.
*Frear, M. W., & Bitchener, J. (2015). The
effects of cognitive task complexity on writing complexity. Journal of Second Language
Writing, 30(4), 45–57.
*Fukuta, J. (2016). Effects
of task repetition on learners’ attention orientation in L2 oral production. Language Teaching
Research, 20(3), 321–340.
*Fukuta, J., & Yamashita, J. (2015). Effects
of cognitive demands on attention in L2 oral
production. System, 53, 1–12.
Fullana, N., Mora-Plaza, I., Mora, J. C., Adrian, M., & Sosa-López, G. (2024). Task
complexity effects on L2 speech rhythm in spontaneous speech production. Second Language
Research.
*García Mayo, M. P., & Imaz Agirre, A. (2016). Task
repetition and its impact on EFL children’s negotiation of meaning strategies and pair dynamics: An exploratory
study. The Language Learning
Journal, 44(4), 451–466.
**García Mayo, M. P., Imaz Agirre, A., & Azkarai, A. (2018). Task
repetition effects on CAF in EFL child task-based oral
interaction. In M. Ahmadian & M. García Mayo (Eds.), Recent
perspectives on task-based language learning and
teaching (pp. 11–28). De Gruyter Mouton.
**Gashan, A. K., & Almohaisen, F. M. (2014). The
effect of task repetition on fluency and accuracy of EFL Saudi female learners’ oral
performance. Advances in Language and Literary
Studies, 5(3), 36–41.
**Gass, S., Mackey, A., Alvarez-Torres, M. J., Fernández-García, M. (1999). The
effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language
Learning, 49(4), 549–581.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What
video games have to teach us about learning and
literacy. Palgrave/Macmillan.
*Genç, H., & Gülözer, K. (2013). The
effect of cognitive load associated with instructional formats and types of presentation on second language reading
comprehension performance. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational
Technology, 12(4), 171–182.
**Genç, Z. (2012). Effects
of strategic planning on the accuracy of oral and written tasks in the performance of Turkish EFL
learners. In A. Shehadeh & C. Coombe (Eds.), Task-based
language teaching in foreign language contexts: Research and
implementation (pp. 67–88). John Benjamins.
**Geng, X., & Ferguson, G. (2013). Strategic
planning in task-based language teaching: The effects of participatory structure and task
type. System, 41(4), 982–993.
**Ghanbarzadeh, S., & Gholami, J. (2014). The
effects of task complexity on the complexity and accuracy of foreign language learners’
essays. Modern Journal of Language Teaching
Methods, 4(2), 25–38.
**Gilabert, R. (2007a). Effects
of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 oral
production. IRAL, 45(3), 215–240.
**Gilabert, R. (2007b). The
simultaneous manipulation of task complexity along planning time and [+/- Here-and-Now]: Effects on L2 oral
production. In M. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Investigating
tasks in formal language
learning (pp. 44–68). Multilingual Matters.
**Gilabert, R., & Barón, J. (2013). The
impact of increasing task complexity on L2 pragmatic moves. In K. McDonough & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second
language interaction in diverse educational
contexts (pp. 45–70). John Benjamins.
**Gilabert, R., Barón, J., & Llanes, À. (2009). Manipulating
cognitive complexity across task types and its impact on learners’ interaction during oral
performance. IRAL, 47(3–4), 367–395.
Gilabert, R., & Malicka, A. (2021). From
needs analysis to task selection, design, and sequencing. In M. J. Ahmadian & M. Long (Eds.), The
Cambridge handbook of task-based language
teaching (pp. 226–249). Cambridge University Press.
Gilabert, R., & Malicka, A. (2022). From
needs analysis to task-based design: Methodology, assessment and programme
evaluation. In N. P. Sudharshana & L. Mukhopadhyay (Eds.), Task-base
language teaching and assessment: Contemporary reflections from across the
world (pp. 93–118). Springer.
Gilabert, R., & Malicka, A. (Eds.). (forthcoming). From
task-based needs analysis to task and syllabus design. John Benjamins.
Givon, T. (1985). Function,
structure, and language acquisition. In D. Slobin (Ed.), The
crosslinguistic study of language
acquisition (Vol. 1) (pp. 1008–1025). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gomez-Laich, M. P., & Taguchi, N. (2018). Task
complexity effects on interaction during a collaborative persuasive writing task: A conversation analytic
perspective. In N. Taguchi & Y. Kim (Eds.), Task-based
approaches to teaching and assessing
pragmatics (pp. 84–109). John Benjamins.
González-Lloret, M., & Ortega, L. (Eds.). (2014). Technology-mediated
TBLT: Researching technology and tasks. John Benjamins.
**Guará-Tavares, M. (2009). The
relationship among pre-task planning, working memory capacity, and L2 speech performance: a pilot
study. Linguagem &
Ensino, 12(1), 165–194.
*Guará-Tavares, M. (2011). Pre-task
planning, working memory capacity and L2 speech
performance. Organon, 51, 255–266.
*Guará-Tavares, M. (2013). Working
memory capacity and L2 speech performance in planned and spontaneous conditions: A correlational
analysis. Trabalhos Em Linguística
Aplicada, 52(1), 9–29.
Gurunandan, K., Carreiras, M., & Paz-Alonso, P. M. (2019). Functional
plasticity associated with language learning in
adults. NeuroImage, 201.
*Haghverdi, H. R., Biria, R., & Khalaji, H. R. (2013). The
impact of task-planning and gender on the accuracy of narrations composed by Iranian EFL
learners. Journal of Language Teaching and
Research, 4(1), 74–83.
Haji, F. A., Cheung, J. J., Woods, N., Regehr, G., de Ribaupierre, S., & Dubrowski, A. (2016). Thrive
or overload? The effect of task complexity on novices’ simulation-based learning. Medical
Education, 50(9), 955–968.
Haji, F. A., Khan, R., Regehr, G., Ng, G., de Ribaupierre, S., & Dubrowski, A. (2015). Operationalising
elaboration theory for simulation instruction design: A Delphi study. Medical
Education, 49, 576–588.
*Hale, G. A. (1988). Student
major field and text content: Interactive effects on reading comprehension in the Test of English as a Foreign
Language. Language
Testing, 5(1), 49–61.
Hattie, J. (2008). Visible
learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to
achievement. Routledge.
*Heidari-Shahreza, M. A., Dabaghi, A., & Kassaian, Z. (2012). The
effects of manipulating task complexity on the occurrence of language-related episodes during learner-learner
interaction. Porta
Linguarum, 17, 173–188.
**Hidalgo, M. Á., & Lázaro-Ibarrola, A. (2020). Task
repetition and collaborative writing by EFL children: Beyond CAF measures. Studies in Second
Language Learning and
Teaching, 10(3), 501–522.
Higa, M. (1965). The
psycholinguistic concept of “difficulty” and the teaching of foreign language
vocabulary. Language
Learning, 15, 167–179.
*Horiba, Y. (2000). Reader
control in reading: Effects of language competence, text type, and task. Discourse
Processes, 29(3), 223–267.
Horrey, W. J., Wickens, C. D., & Consalus, K. P. (2006). Modeling
drivers’ visual attention allocation while interacting with in-vehicle technologies. Journal of
Experimental Psychology:
Applied, 12(2), 67–78.
Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (Eds.). (2012). Dimensions
of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in SLA. John Benjamins.
**Hsu, H.-C. (2012). Investigating
the effects of planning on L2 text chat performance. CALICO
Journal, 29(4), 619–638.
*Hsu, H.-C. (2017). The
effect of task planning on L2 performance and L2 development in text-based synchronous computer-mediated
communication. Applied
Linguistics, 38(3), 359–385.
Hsu, H.-C. (2020). The
impact of task complexity on patterns of interaction during web-based asynchronous collaborative writing
tasks. System, 93.
**Hu, X. (2018). Effects
of task type, task-type repetition, and performance criteria on L2 oral
production. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Learning
language through task
repetition (pp. 143–169). John Benjamins.
**Huh, M. H., & Lee, J. (2018). Task
complexity and writing prompts and performance in EFL high school students’ narrative
writing. English
Teaching, 73(4), 55–72.
Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some
empirical evidence for involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language
Learning, 51, 539–558.
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods
of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research
findings. Sage.
**Hyun, J.-E., & Lee, J.-H. (2018). The
effects of task complexity and working memory on Korean adult learners’ English speaking
performance. English
Teaching, 73(1), 115–134.
In’nami, Y., & Koizumi, R. (2010). Database
selection guidelines for meta-analysis in applied linguistics. TESOL
Quarterly, 44(1), 169–184.
Inoue, C. (2016). A
comparative study of the variables used to measure syntactic complexity and accuracy in task-based
research. The Language Learning
Journal, 44(4), 487–505.
**Ishikawa, T. (2006). The
effect of task complexity and language proficiency on task-based language performance. The
Journal of Asia
TEFL, 3(4), 193–225.
**Ishikawa, T. (2007). The
effect of manipulating task complexity along the [+/– Here-and-Now] dimension on L2 written narrative
discourse. In M. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Investigating
tasks in formal language
learning (pp. 136–156). Multilingual Matters.
**Ishikawa, T. (2008). The
effects of task demands of intentional reasoning on L2 speech performance. The Journal of Asia
TEFL, 5(1), 29–63
**Ishikawa, T. (2011). Examining
the influence of intentional reasoning demands on learner perceptions of task difficulty and L2 monologic
speech. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second
language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and
performance (pp. 307–330). John Benjamins.
**Ishikawa, T. (2014). The
influence of intentional reasoning on EFL fluency using
tasks. In T. Muller, J. Adamson, P. S. Brown, & S. Herder (Eds.), Exploring
EFL fluency in
Asia (pp. 143–160). Palgrave Macmillan.
Issenberg, S. B., McGaghie, W. C., Hart, I. R., Mayer, J. W., Felner, J. M., Petrusa, E. R., … & Ewy, G. A. (1999). Simulation
technology for health care professional skills training and
assessment. JAMA, 282(9), 861–866.
Issenberg, S. B., Mcgaghie, W. C., Petrusa, E. R., Lee Gordon, D., & Scalese, R. J. (2005). Features
and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: A BEME systematic
review. Medical
Teacher, 27(1), 10–28.
*Iwashita, N., McNamara, T., & Elder, C. (2001). Can
we predict task difficulty in an oral proficiency test? Exploring the potential of an information-processing approach to task
design. Language
Learning, 51(3), 401–436.
Jackson, D. O., & Suethanapornkul, S. (2013). The
Cognition Hypothesis: A synthesis and meta-analysis of research on second language task
complexity. Language
Learning, 63(2), 330–367.
Johnson, M. D. (2017). Cognitive
task complexity and L2 written syntactic complexity, accuracy, lexical complexity, and fluency: A research synthesis and
meta-analysis. Journal of Second Language
Acquisition, 37, 13–38.
Johnson, M. D., & Abdi Tabari, M. (2022). Task
planning and oral L2 production: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Applied
Linguistics, 43(6), 1143–1164.
Johnson, M. D., & Abdi Tabari, M. (2023). Planning
in L2 writing: A research synthesis and
meta-analysis. System, 118.
*Johnson, M. D., Mercado, L., & Acevedo, A. (2012). The
effect of planning sub-processes on L2 writing fluency, grammatical complexity, and lexical
complexity. Journal of Second Language
Writing, 21(3), 264–282.
**Jung, J. (2016). Effects
of task complexity on L2 reading and L2 learning. English
Teaching, 71(4), 141–166.
**Jung, J. (2017). Effects
of task complexity on L2 writing processes and linguistic complexity: A keystroke logging
study. English
Teaching, 72(4), 179–200.
**Jung, J. (2018). Effects
of task complexity and working memory capacity on L2 reading
comprehension. System, 74, 21–37.
**Jung, J. (2020). Effects
of content support on integrated reading-writing task performance and incidental vocabulary
learning. System, 93, 21–37.
**Kaivanpanah, S., & Alavi, S. M. (2008). The
role of linguistic knowledge in word-meaning
inferencing. System, 36(2), 172–195.
Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The
expertise reversal effect. Educational
Psychologist, 38(1), 23–31.
**Kang, S., & Lee, J. H. (2019). Are
two heads always better than one? The effects of collaborative planning on L2 writing in relation to task
complexity. The Journal of Second Language
Writing, 45, 61–72.
Kasanga, L. A. (1996). Peer
interaction and L2 learning. The Canadian Modern Language
Review, 52(4), 611–639.
Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A
model of working memory in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The
science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (p.
57–71). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Keys, B., & Wolfe, J. (1990). The
role of management games and simulations in education and research. Journal of
Management, 16(2), 307–336.
*Khabbazbashi, N. (2015). Topic
and background knowledge effects on performance in speaking assessment. Language
Testing, 34(1), 23–48.
Khabbazbashi, N. (2017). Topic
and background knowledge effects on performance in speaking assessment. Language
Testing, 34(1), 23–48.
*Khatib, M., & Farahanynia, M. (2020). Planning
conditions (strategic planning, task repetition, and joint planning), cognitive task complexity, and task type: Effects on L2
oral
performance. System, 93, 1–12.
**Khezrlou, S. (2019). Effects
of timing and availability of isolated FFI on learners’ written accuracy and fluency through task
repetition. The Language Learning
Journal, 49(5), 568–580.
**Khezrlou, S. (2020). The
role of task repetition with direct written corrective feedback in L2 writing complexity, accuracy and
fluency. Journal of Second Language
Studies, 3(1), 31–54.
**Khorasani, R., Pandian, A., Ismail, S. A. M. M., & Alavi, S. (2014). Looking
into accuracy, complexity and fluency of EFL learners’ written task production and the potency of unguided
planning. In A. Pandian, C. L. C. Ling, D. T. A. Lin, J. Muniandy, L. B. Choo, & T. C. Hiang (Eds.), Language
teaching and learning: New dimensions and
interventions (pp. 346–359). Cambridge Scholars.
**Kim, N. (2018). The
effects of online planning on CAF in L2 spoken and written performance. English
Teaching, 73(3), 3–28.
**Kim, N. (2020). Conditions
and tasks: The effects of planning and task complexity on L2 speaking. The Journal of Asia
TEFL, 17(1), 34–52.
*Kim, N. (2023[2020]). The
effects of different task sequences on novice L2 learners’ oral performance in the
classroom. Language Teaching
Research, 27(2), 415–440.
**Kim, Y. (2009). The
effects of task complexity on learner-learner
interaction. System, 37(2), 254–268.
**Kim, Y. (2012). Task
complexity, learning opportunities, and Korean EFL learners’ question development. Studies in
Second Language
Acquisition, 34(4), 627–658.
*Kim, Y., Choi, B., Yun, H., Kim, B., & Choi, S. (2022[2020]). Task
repetition, synchronous written corrective feedback and the learning of Korean grammar: A classroom-based
study. Language Teaching
Research, 26(6), 1106–1132.
**Kim, Y., Crossley, S., Jung, Y., Kyle, K., & Kang, S. (2018). The
effects of task repetition and task complexity on L2 lexicon
use. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Language
learning through task
repetition (pp. 75–96). John Benjamins.
*Kim, Y., Kang, S., Yun, H., Kim, B., & Choi, B. (2020). The
role of task repetition in a Korean as a foreign language classroom: Writing quality, attention to form, and learning of
Korean grammar. Foreign Language
Annals, 53(4), 827–849.
Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2011). Using
pretask modelling to encourage collaborative learning opportunities. Language Teaching
Research, 15(2), 183–199.
*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. 151–178). Bloomsbury.
**Kim, Y., & Payant, C. (2017). Impacts
of task complexity on the development of L2 oral performance over
time. IRAL, 55(2), 197–220.
*Kim, Y., Payant, C., & Pearson, P. (2015). The
intersection of task-based interaction, task complexity, and working memory: L2 question development through recasts in a
laboratory setting. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 37(3), 549–581.
*Kim, Y., & Taguchi, N. (2015). Promoting
task-based pragmatics instruction in EFL classroom contexts: the role of task complexity. The
Modern Language
Journal, 99(4), 656–677.
**Kim, Y., & Taguchi, N. (2016). Learner-learner
interaction during collaborative pragmatic tasks: The role of cognitive and pragmatic task
demands. Foreign Language
Annals, 49(1), 42–57.
**Kim, Y., & Tracy-Ventura, N. (2011). Task
complexity, language anxiety, and the development of the simple
past. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second
language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and
performance (pp. 287–306). John Benjamins.
**Knoch, U., & Elder, C. (2010). Validity
and fairness implications of varying time conditions on a diagnostic test of academic English writing
proficiency. System, 38(1), 63–74.
*Kobayashi, M., & Kobayashi, E. (1999). Does
familiarity breed improvement? Task familiarity in story-retelling by Japanese ESL
learners. In N. Jungheim & P. Robinson (Eds.), Pragmatics
and pedagogy: Proceedings of the third Pacific Second Research
Forum (Vol. 2, pp.143–154). The Pacific Second Language Research Forum.
Kobayashi, E., & Kobayashi, M. (2018). Second
language learning through repeated engagement in a poster presentation
task. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Language
learning through task
repetition (pp. 223–254). John Benjamins.
**Kobeleva, P. (2012). Second
language listening and unfamiliar proper names: Comprehension barrier? RELC
Journal, 43(1), 83–98.
Koizumi, R., & In’nami, Y. (2024). Predicting
functional adequacy from complexity, accuracy, and fluency of second-language picture-prompted
speaking. System, 120.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential
learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. Prentice-Hall.
**Kormos, J. (2011). Task
complexity and linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance. Journal of
Second Language
Writing, 20(2), 148–161.
*Kormos, J., & Préfontaine, Y. (2017). Affective
factors influencing fluent performance: French learners’ appraisals of second language speech
tasks. Language Teaching
Research, 21(6), 699–716.
**Kormos, J., & Trebits, A. (2011). Working
memory capacity and narrative task performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second
language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and
performance (pp. 267–286). John Benjamins.
*Kormos, J., & Trebits, A. (2012). The
role of task complexity, modality, and aptitude in narrative task performance. Language
Learning, 62(2), 439–472.
Korvesi, E., Michel, M. (2022). Chatting
with your peers across modalities: Effects of performing increasingly complex written computer-mediated tasks on Oral L2
development. Languages, 7(4), 276.
**Kourtali, N. E., & Révész, A. (2020). The
roles of recasts, task complexity, and aptitude in child second language development. Language
Learning, 70(1), 179–218.
**Kovač, M. M., & Vickov, G. (2018). The
impact of immediate task repetition on breakdown
fluency. Govor, 35(2), 139–160.
*Kozan, K., Erçetin, G., & Richardson, J. C. (2015). Input
modality and working memory: Effects on second language text comprehension in a multimedia learning
environment. System, 55, 63–73.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A
revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into
Practice, 41, 212–218.
*Krekeler, C. (2006). Language
for special academic purposes (LSAP) testing: The effect of background knowledge
revisited. Language
Testing, 23(1), 99–130.
**Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007a). Cognitive
task complexity and linguistic performance in French L2
writing. In M. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Investigating
tasks in formal language
learning (pp. 117–135). Multilingual Matters.
*Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007b). Task
complexity and measures of linguistic performance in L2
writing. IRAL, 45(3), 261–284.
**Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2008). Cognitive
task complexity and written output in Italian and French as a foreign language. Journal of
Second Language
Writing, 17(1), 48–60.
**Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2011). Task
complexity and linguistic performance in L2 writing and speaking: The effect of
mode. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second
language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and
performance (pp. 91–104). John Benjamins.
*Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2012). Syntactic
complexity, lexical variation and accuracy as a function of task complexity and proficiency level in L2 writing and
speaking. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions
of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in
SLA (pp. 143–170). John Benjamins.
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2017). Functional
adequacy in L2 writing: Towards a new rating scale. Language
Testing, 34(3), 321–336.
Kuiken, F. & Vedder, I. (2022). Measurement
of functional adequacy in different learning contexts: Rationale, key issues, and future
perspectives. TASK, 2(2), 8–32.
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2025). From
CAF to CAFFA: Measuring linguistic performance and functional adequacy in task-based language
teaching. In M. East (Ed.), Broadening
the horizon of TBLT: Plenary addresses from the second decade of the International Conference on Task-Based Language
Teaching. John Benjamins.
*Kuiken, F., Mos, M., & Vedder, I. (2005). Cognitive
task complexity and second language writing performance. In S. Foster-Cohen, M. P. García Mayo, & J. Cenoz (Eds.), Eurosla
Yearbook (Vol 5, pp. 195–222). John Benjamins.
Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. A. (2018). Measuring
syntactic complexity in L2 writing using fine-grained clausal and phrasal indices. The Modern
Language
Journal, 102(2), 333–349.
**Lambert, C., Kormos, J., & Minn, D. (2017). Task
repetition and second language speech processing. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 39(1), 167–196.
Lane, L. W., & Ferreira, V. S. (2008). Speaker-external
versus speaker-internal forces on utterance form: Do cognitive demands override threats to referential
success? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, &
Cognition, 34, 1466–1481.
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental
vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied
Linguistics, 22, 1–26.
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary
size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied
Linguistics, 16(3), 307–322.
*Lázaro-Ibarrola, A., & Villarreal, I. (2019). Questioning
the effectiveness of procedural repetition: The case of spanish EFL primary school learners’ L2 behavior in college language
learners. Porta
Linguarum, 31, 7–20.
Lee, C. H., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Effectiveness
of on-screen pinyin in learning Chinese: An expertise reversal for multimedia redundancy
effect. Computer in Human
Behavior, 27(1), 11–15.
*Lee, H. (2013). The
influence of social situations on fluency difficulty in Korean EFL learners’ oral
refusals. Journal of
Pragmatics, 50(1), 168–186.
*Lee, H., Oh, M., & Shin, Y. (2007). The
Effects of planning time on the second language performance in a narrative task. English
Teaching, 62(1), 105–120.
**Lee, J. (2020). Task
closure and task complexity effects on L2 written performance. Journal of Second Language
Writing, 50.
*Lee, S.-K. (2007). Effects
of textual enhancement and topic familiarity on Korean EFL students’ reading comprehension and learning of passive
form. Language
Learning, 57(1), 87–118.
*Leeser, M. J. (2004). The
effects of topic familiarity, mode, and pausing on second language learners’ comprehension and focus on
form. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 26(4), 587–615.
**Leeser, M. J. (2007). Learner-based
factors in L2 reading comprehension and processing grammatical form: Topic familiarity and working
memory. Language
Learning, 57(2), 229–270.
Levelt, W. J. (1999). Producing
spoken language: A blueprint for the speaker. In C. Brown & P. Hagoort (Eds.), Neurocognition
of
language (pp. 83–122). Oxford University Press.
**Levkina, M., & Gilabert, R. (2012). The
effects of cognitive task complexity on L2 oral production. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions
of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in
SLA (pp. 171–198). John Benjamins.
*Li, J. (2014). Examining
genre effects on test takers’ summary writing performance. Assessing
Writing, 22, 75–90.
*Li, L., Chen, J., & Sun, L. (2015). The
effects of different lengths of pretask planning time on L2 learners’ oral test
performance. TESOL
Quarterly, 49(1), 38–66.
Li, S. (Ed.). (2024). Individual
differences and task-based language teaching. John Benjamins.
**Liaghat, F., & Biria, R. (2018). A
comparative study on mentor text modelling and common approaches to teaching writing in Iranian EFL
context. International Journal of
Instruction, 11(3), 701–720.
**Lin, H., & Chen, T. (2006). Decreasing
cognitive load for novice EFL learners: Effects of question and descriptive advance organizers in facilitating EFL learners’
comprehension of an animation-based content
lesson. System, 34(3), 416–431.
**Lin, J. J. H., Lee, Y.-H., Wang, D.-Y., & Lin, S. S. J. (2016). Reading
subtitles and taking enotes while learning scientific materials in a multimedia environment: Cognitive load perspectives on
EFL students. Journal of Educational Technology &
Society, 19(4), 47–58.
Lipsey, M., & Wilson, D. (1993). The
efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from
meta-analysis. American
Psychologist, 48, 1181–1209.
**Litvinenko, E. V., Sirazova, L. S., & Toptsi, J. E. (2019). Influence
of planning in oral teaching methods. International Journal of Higher
Education, 8(7), 56–61.
Long, M. H., & Crooks, G. (1992). Three
approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL
Quarterly, 26, 27–56.
**Ma, F. F., & Zainal, A. Z. (2018). The
effects of planning conditions on primary school ESL pupils’ narrative writing. Indonesian
Journal of Applied
Linguistics, 7(3), 559–574.
**Machado, C., & Luchini, P. L. (2018). Cognitive
Load Theory, redundancy effect and language learning. In R. Ponniah & S. Venkatesan (Eds.), The
idea and practice of
reading (pp. 177–190). Springer.
**Mackey, A., Kanganas, A. P., & Oliver, R. (2007). Task
familiarity and interactional feedback in child ESL classrooms. TESOL
Quarterly, 41, 285–312.
*Mahpul, M., & Oliver, R. (2018). The
effect of task complexity in dialogic oral production by Indonesian EFL learners. Asian EFL
Journal, 20(6), 33–65.
Malicka, A. (2014a). The
role of task complexity and task sequencing in L2 monologic oral production (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). University of Barcelona.
*Malicka, A. (2014b). The
role of task sequencing in monologic oral production. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert, & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task
sequencing and instructed second language
learning (pp. 71–93). Bloomsbury.
**Malicka, A. (2020). The
role of task sequencing in fluency, accuracy, and complexity: Investigating the SSARC model of pedagogic task
sequencing. Language Teaching
Research, 24(5), 642–665.
Malicka, A., Gilabert, R., & Norris, J. M. (2019). From
needs analysis to task design: Insights from an English for Academic Purposes context. Language
Teaching
Research, 23(1), 78–106.
**Malicka, A., & Levkina, M. (2012). Measuring
task complexity: Does L2 proficiency matter? In A. Shehadeh & C. Coombe (Eds.), Task-based
language teaching in foreign language contexts: Research and
implementation (pp. 43–66). John Benjamins.
Manchón, R. M. (Ed.) (2020). Writing
and language learning: Advancing research. John Benjamins.
**Marefat, H., Rezaee, A. A., & Naserieh, F. (2016). Effect
of computerized gloss presentation format on reading comprehension: A cognitive load
perspective. Journal of Information Technology Education:
Research, 15, 479–501.
Marín-Martínez, F., & Sánchez-Meca, J. (1999). Averaging
dependent effect sizes in meta-analysis: A cautionary note about procedures. The Spanish
Journal of
Psychology, 2, 32–38.
Mayer, R. E. (2024). The
past, present, and future of the Cognitive Load Theory of multimedia learning. Educational
Psychology Review, 36(6).
*Mayer, R. E., Lee, H., & Peebles, A. (2014). Multimedia
learning in a second language: A cognitive load perspective. Applied Cognitive
Psychology, 28(5), 653–660.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nice
ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational
Psychologist, 38, 43–52.
*Mehnert, U. (1998). The
effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in
Second Language
Acquisition, 20, 83–108.
**Meraji, S. R. (2011). Planning
time, strategy use, and written task production in a pedagogic vs. a testing context. Journal
of Language Teaching and
Research, 2(2), 338–352.
Mercado, E. III. (2008). Neural
and cognitive plasticity: From maps to minds. Psychological
Bulletin, 134(1), 109–137.
**Michel, M. C. (2011). Effects
of task complexity and interaction on L2 performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second
language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and
performance (pp. 141–173). John Benjamins.
**Michel, M. C. (2013). The
use of conjunctions in cognitively simple versus complex oral L2 tasks. The Modern Language
Journal, 97(1), 178–195.
Michel, M. (2017). Complexity,
accuracy, and fluency in L2 production. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of instructed second language
acquisition (pp. 50–68). Routledge.
**Michel, M. C., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007). The
influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch
L2. IRAL, 45(3), 241–259.
*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(1), 11–37.
*Mohammad, M. K. M., & Alwi, N. A. (2019). The
impact of task complexity on EFL learners’ writing production across gender. International
Journal of Engineering and Advanced
Technology, 8(5), 1218–1220.
*Mohammadzadeh Mohammadabadi, A., Dabaghi, A., & Tavakoli, M. (2013). The
effects of simultaneous use of pre-planning along +/-Here-and-Now dimension on fluency, complexity, and accuracy of Iranian
EFL learners’ written performance. International Journal of Research Studies in Language
Learning, 2(3), 49–65.
Mora, J. C., Mora-Plaza, I., & Bermejo Miranda, G. (2024). Speaking
anxiety and task complexity effects on second language speech. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics, 34(1), 292–315.
*Moussa-Inaty, J., Atallah, F., & Causapin, M. (2019). Instructional
mode: A better predictor of performance than student preferred learning styles. International
Journal of
Instruction, 12(3), 17–34.
Moussa-Inaty, J., Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2012). Improving
listening skills in English as a foreign language by reading rather than listening: A cognitive load
perspective. Applied Cognitive
Psychology, 26(3), 391–402.
Munn, Z., Peters, M. D., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic
review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review
approach. BMC Medical Research
Methodology, 18(1), 1–7.
*Murphy, L., & Roca de Larios, J. (2010). Searching
for words: One strategic use of the mother tongue by advanced Spanish EFL writers. Journal of
Second Language
Writing, 19(2), 61–81.
Nakahama, Y. (2009). Tasuku no fukuzatsusei, bogo, nihongo nouryoku ga danwa kousei ni oyobosu eikyou: Shiji hyougen, ukemi hyougen
no shiyou ni tsuite [Effects of task complexity, L1 and proficiency on the
use of referential and passive forms in L2 Japanese discourse]. JALT
Journal, 31(1), 101–120.
Nakahama, Y. (2013). Tasuku no fukuzatsusa to gengo unyou (seikakusa, fukuzatsusa, danwa no shiten settei) to no
kanrensei [The effect of task complexity on language performance (accuracy,
complexity and discourse perspective setting)]. Daini gengo to shite no nihongo no
shuutoku kenkyuu [Acquisition of Japanese as a Second
Language], 16, 38–55.
*Nawal, A. F. (2018). Cognitive
load theory in the context of second language academic writing. Higher Education
Pedagogies, 3(1), 385–402.
*Nielson, K. B. (2014). Can
planning time compensate for individual differences in working memory capacity? Language
Teaching
Research, 18(3), 272–293.
**Nielson, K. B., & DeKeyser, R. (2019). Working
memory and planning time as predictors of fluency and accuracy. Journal of Second Language
Studies, 2(2), 281–316.
Nitta, R., & Baba, K. (2018). Understanding
benefits of repetition from a complex dynamic system perspective: The case of a writing
task. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Language
learning through task
repetition (pp. 279–310). John Benjamins.
**Nitta, R., & Nakatsuhara, F. (2014). A
multifaceted approach to investigating pre-task planning effects on paired oral test
performance. Language
Testing, 31(2), 147–175.
Norris, J. M. (2001). Identifying
rating criteria for task-based EAP assessment. In T. D. Hudson, & J. D. Brown (Eds.), A
focus on language test development: Expanding the language proficiency construct across a variety of
tests (pp. 163–204). University of Hawai‘i Press.
Norris, J. M. (2009). Task-based
teaching and testing. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook
of language
teaching (pp. 578–594). Blackwell.
Norris, J. M. (2010). Understanding
instructed SLA: Constructs, contexts, and consequences. Plenary address delivered at
the annual conference of the European Second Language Association
(EUROSLA), Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Norris, J. M. (2012). Meta-analysis. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The
encyclopedia of applied linguistics.
Norris, J. M. (2014, August). Committing
to a synthetic ethic in applied linguistics research. Presentation at
the 50th International Association of Applied Linguistics (AILA)
conference, Brisbane, Australia.
Norris, J. M. (2015). Thinking
and acting programmatically in task-based language teaching: Essential roles for program
evaluation. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Domains
and directions in the development of TBLT: A decade of plenaries from the international
conference (pp. 27–57). John Benjamins.
Norris, J. M. (2016). Current
uses for task-based language assessment. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 36, 230–244.
Norris, J. M. (2018). Task-based
language assessment: Aligning designs with intended uses and consequences. JLTA
Journal, 21, 3–20.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness
of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language
Learning, 50, 417–528.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2003). Defining
and measuring SLA. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The
handbook of second language
acquisition (pp. 716–761). Blackwell.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (Eds.). (2006). Synthesizing
research on language learning and teaching. John Benjamins.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2007). The
future of research synthesis in applied linguistics: Beyond art or science? TESOL
Quarterly, 41(4), 805–815.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2009). Towards
an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied
Linguistics, 30(4), 555–578.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2010). Timeline:
Research synthesis. Language
Teaching, 43(4), 461–479.
Norris, J. M., Plonsky, L., Ross, S. J., & Schoonen, R. (2015). Guidelines
for reporting quantitative methods and results in primary research. Language
Learning, 65(2), 470–476.
Norris, J. M., Sasayama, S., & Kim, M. (2023). Simulating
real-world context in an e-mail writing task: Implications for task-based language assessment (TOEFL
Research Report RR-23-05). ETS.
Norouzian, R., & Bui, G. (2024). Meta-analysis
of second language research with complex research designs. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 46, 251–276.
**Nuevo, A.-M., Adams, R., & Ross-Feldman, L. (2011). Task
complexity, modified output, and L2 development in learner-learner
interaction. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second
language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and
performance (pp. 175–201). John Benjamins.
**O’Grady, S. (2019). The
impact of pre-task planning on speaking test performance for English-medium university
admission. Language
Testing, 36(4), 505–526.
Oliver, R. (1998). Negotiation
of meaning in child interactions. The Modern Language
Journal, 82, 372–356.
*Ong, J. (2013). Discovery
of ideas in second language writing task
environment. System, 41(3), 529–542.
*Ong, J., & Zhang, L. J. (2010). Effects
of task complexity on the fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students’ argumentative
writing. Journal of Second Language
Writing, 19(4), 218–233.
*Ong, J., & Zhang, L. J. (2013). Effects
of the manipulation of cognitive processes on EFL writers’ text quality. TESOL
Quarterly, 47(2), 375–398.
**Ortega, L. (1999). Planning
and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 21(1), 109–148.
Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic
complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2
writing. Applied
Linguistics, 24(4), 492–518.
Ortega, L. (2010). Research
synthesis. In B. Paltridge & A. Phakiti (Eds.), Companion
to research methods in applied
linguistics (pp. 111–126). Continuum.
Ortega, L. (2015). Research
synthesis. In B. Paltridge & A. Phakiti (Eds.), Research
methods in applied linguistics: A practical
resource (pp. 225–244). Bloomsbury.
Oswald, F. L., & Plonsky, L. (2010). Meta-analysis
in second language research: Choices and challenges. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 30, 85–110.
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. (2003). Cognitive
load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational
Psychologist, 38(1), 63–71.
Pallotti, G. (2009). CAF:
Defining, refining and differentiating constructs. Applied
Linguistics, 30(4), 590–601.
**Panahzadeh, V., & Asadi, B. (2019). On
the impacts of pressured vs. unpressured online task planning on EFL students’ oral production in classroom and testing
contexts. Eurasian Journal of Applied
Linguistics, 5(3), 341–352.
Pang, F., & Skehan, P. (2014). Self-reported
planning behavior and second language performance in narrative
retelling. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing
perspectives on task
performance (pp. 95–128). John Benjmains.
Paradis, J. (2010). Bilingual
children’s acquisition of English verb morphology: Effects of language exposure, structure complexity, and task
type. Language
Learning, 60(3), 651–680.
**Park, S. (2010). The
influence of pretask instructions and pretask planning on focus on form during Korean EFL task-based
interaction. Language Teaching
Research, 14(1), 9–26.
**Payant, C., & Reagan, D. (2018). Manipulating
task implementation variables with incipient Spanish language learners: A classroom-based
study. Language Teaching
Research, 22(2), 169–188.
Peebles, D., Cheng, P. C.-H., & Shadbolt, N. (1999). Multiple
processes in graph-based reasoning. In M. Hahn & S. S. Stoness (Eds.), Proceedings
of the twenty first annual conference of the cognitive science
society (pp. 531–536). Routledge.
**Peters, E. (2007). L2
vocabulary acquisition and reading comprehension: The influence of task
complexity. In M. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Investigating
tasks in formal language
learning (pp. 178–198). Multilingual Matters.
Phakiti, A., De Costa, P., Plonsky, L., & Starfield, S. (2018). Applied
linguistics research: Current issues, methods, and trends. In A. Phakiti, P. De Costa, L. Plonsky, and S. Starfield (eds.), The
Palgrave handbook of applied linguistics research methodology. Palgrave Macmillan.
Pham, M. T., Rajić, A., Greig, J. D., Sargeant, J. M., Papadopoulos, A., & McEwen, S. A. (2014). A
scoping review of scoping reviews: Advancing the approach and enhancing the
consistency. Research Synthesis
Methods, 5(4), 371–385.
**Philp, J., Oliver, R., & Mackey, A. (2006). The
impact of planning time on children’s task-based
interactions. System, 34(4), 547–565.
Pica, T., Kang, H-S., & Sauro, S. (2006). Information
gap tasks: Their multiple roles and contributions to interaction research methodology. Studies
in Second Language
Acquisition, 28(2), 301–338.
Pigott, T. D., & Polanin, J. R. (2020). Methodological
guidance paper: High-quality meta-analysis in a systematic review. Review of Educational
Research, 90(1), 24–46.
Pinker, S. (1990). A
theory of graph comprehension. In R. Freedle (Ed.), Artificial
intelligence and the future of
testing (p. 73–126). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pinter, A. (2007). Some
benefits of peer-peer interaction: 10-year-old children practising with a communication
task. Language Teaching
Research, 11(2), 189–207.
Plonsky, L. (2023). Sampling
and generalizability in Lx research: A second order
synthesis. Languages, 8(1), 75.
Plonsky, L., & Kim, Y. (2016). Task-based
learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 36, 73–97.
Plonsky, L., & Gönülal, T. (2015). Methodological
synthesis in quantitative L2 research: A review of reviews and a case study of exploratory factor
analysis. Language
Learning, 65 (s1), 9–36.
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How
big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language
Learning, 64(4), 878–912.
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2015). Meta-analyzing
second language research. In L. Plonsky (Ed.), Advancing
quantitative methods in second language
research (pp. 106–128). Routledge.
**Plough, I., & Gass, S. (1993). Interlocutor
and task familiarity: Effects on interactional structure. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks
and language learning. Integrating theory and
practice (pp. 35–56). Multilingual Matters.
Polio, C., & Yoon, H. J. (2024). Complexity,
accuracy, and fluency (CALF) measures. In M. Kessler & C. Polio (Eds.), Conducting
genre-based research in Applied Linguistics: A methodological
guide (pp. 149–171). Routledge.
Prabhu, N. S. (1984). Procedural
syllabuses. In T. E. Read (Ed.), Trends
in language syllabus
design (pp. 272–280). Singapore University Press.
Préfontaine, Y., & Kormos, J. (2015). The
relationship between task difficulty and second language fluency in French: A mixed methods
approach. The Modern Language
Journal, 99(1), 96–112.
**Pulido, D. (2004). The
relationship between text comprehension and second language incidental vocabulary acquisition: A matter of topic
familiarity? Language
Learning, 54(3), 469–523.
**Pulido, D. (2007). The
effects of topic familiarity and passage sight vocabulary on L2 lexical inferencing and retention through
reading. Applied
Linguistics, 28(1), 66–86.
*Pulido, D. (2009). How
involved are American L2 learners of Spanish in lexical input processing tasks during
reading? Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 31(1), 31–58.
*Qin, J., & Zhang, Y. (2022[2019]). Pre-task
planning and discourse cohesion: Analysis of Chinese EFL learners’ referential use in oral
narratives. Language Teaching
Research, 26(1), 1–19.
*Qiu, X. (2020). Functions
of oral monologic tasks: Effects of topic familiarity on L2 speaking performance. Language
Teaching
Research, 24(6), 745–764.
**Qiu, X., & Lo, Y. Y. (2017). Content
familiarity, task repetition and Chinese EFL learners’ engagement in second language
use. Language Teaching
Research, 21(6), 681–698.
*Rafie, Z. F., Rahmany, R., & Sadeqi, B. (2015). The
differential effects of three types of task planning on the accuracy of L2 oral
production. Journal of Language Teaching and
Research, 6(6), 1297–1304.
**Rahimi, M. (2019). Effects
of increasing the degree of reasoning and the number of elements on L2 argumentative
writing. Language Teaching
Research, 23(5), 633–654.
**Rahimi, M., & Zhang, L. J. (2018). Effects
of task complexity and planning conditions on L2 argumentative writing production. Discourse
Processes, 55(8), 726–742.
*Rahimi, M., & Zhang, L. J. (2019). Writing
task complexity, students’ motivational beliefs, anxiety and their writing production in English as a second
language. Reading and
Writing, 32(3), 761–786.
*Rahimpour, M. (1999). Task
complexity and variation in interlanguage. In N. Jungheim & P. Robinson (Eds.), Pragmatics
and pedagogy: Proceedings of the third Pacific Second Research
Forum (Vol. 2, pp.115–134). The Pacific Second Language Research Forum.
*Rahimpour, M., & Mehrang, F. (2010). Investigating
effects of task structure on EFL learner’s oral performance. English Language
Teaching, 3(4), 10–17.
**Rahimpour, M., & Hosseini, P. (2010). The
impact of task complexity on L2 learners’ written narratives. English Language
Teaching, 3(3), 198–205.
**Rai, M. K., Loschky, L. C., & Harris, R. J. (2015). The
effects of stress on reading: A comparison of first-language versus intermediate second-language reading
comprehension. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 107(2), 348–363.
Raia, A. P. (1966). A
study of the educational value of management games. The Journal of
Business, 39(3), 339–352.
Ravid, D., & Tolchinsky, M. (2002). Developing
linguistic literacy: A comprehensive model. Journal of Child
Language, 29(2), 419–448.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1979). In
search of a better way to organize instruction: The elaboration theory. Journal of
Instructional
Development, 2, 8–15.
*Révész, A. (2009). Task
complexity, focus on form, and second language development. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 31(3), 437–470.
**Révész, A. (2011). Task
complexity, focus on L2 constructions, and individual differences: A classroom-based study. The
Modern Language
Journal, 95(1), 162–181.
Révész, A. (2014). Towards
a fuller assessment of cognitive models of task-based learning: Investigating task-generated cognitive demands and
processes. Applied
Linguistics, 35, 87–92.
Révész, A., & Brunfaut, T. (2013). Text
characteristics of task input and difficulty in second language listening
comprehension. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 35, 31–65.
Révész, A., Ekiert, M., & Torgersen, E. (2016). The
effects of complexity, accuracy and fluency on communicative adequacy in oral task
performance. Applied
Linguistics, 37(6), 828–848.
*Révész, A., & Han, Z. (2006). Task
content familiarity, task type and efficacy of recasts. Language
Awareness, 15(3), 160–179.
Révész, A., Jeong, H., Suzuki, S., Cui, H., Matsuura, S., Saito, K., & Sugiura, M. (2024). Task-generated
processes in second language speech production: Exploring the neural correlates of task complexity during silent
pauses. Studies in Second Language Acquisition.
**Révész, A., Kourtali, N. E., & Mazgutova, D. (2017). Effects
of task complexity on L2 writing behaviors and linguistic complexity. Language
Learning, 67(1), 208–241.
Révész, A., Michel, M., & Gilabert, R. (2016). Measuring
cognitive task demands using dual-task methodology, subjective self-ratings, and expert judgments: A validation
study. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 38(4), 703–737.
Révész, A., Sachs, R., & Hama, M. (2014). The
effects of task complexity and input frequency on the acquisition of the past counterfactual construction through
recasts. Language
Learning, 64, 615–650.
*Révész, A., Sachs, R., & Mackey, A. (2011). Task
complexity, uptake of recasts, and L2 development. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second
language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and
performance (pp. 203–235). John Benjamins.
Robinson, P. (1995a). Attention,
memory and the ‘noticing’ hypothesis. Language
Learning, 45, 283–331.
**Robinson, P. (1995b). Task
complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language
Learning, 45(1), 99–141.
Robinson, P. (2001a). 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 University Press.
Robinson, P. (2001b). Task
complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential
framework. Applied
Linguistics, 22, 27–57.
Robinson, P. (2003a). Attention
and memory during SLA. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook
of second language
acquisition (pp. 631–678). Blackwell.
Robinson, P. (2003b). The
cognitive hypothesis of adult, task-based language learning. Second Language
Studies, 21, 45–105.
Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive
complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task
design. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language
Teaching, 43(1), 1–32.
**Robinson, P. (2007a). 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.
Robinson, P. (2007b). Criteria
for grading and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In M. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Investigating
tasks in formal language
learning (pp. 7–27). Multilingual Matters.
Robinson, P. (2010). Situating
and distributing cognition across task demands: The SSARC model of pedagogic task
sequencing. In M. Putz & L. Sicola (Eds.), Cognitive
processing in second language acquisition: Inside the learner’s
mind (pp. 239–264). John Benjamins.
Robinson, P. (2011a). Task-based
language learning: A review of issues. Language
Learning, 61, 1–36.
Robinson, P. (Ed.). (2011b). Second
language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and
performance. John Benjamins.
Robinson, P. (2015). The
Cognition Hypothesis, second language task demands, and the SSARC model of pedagogic task
sequencing. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Domains
and directions in the development of TBLT: A decade of plenaries from the international
conference (pp. 78–122). John Benjamins.
Robinson, P. (2021). The
Cognition Hypothesis, the Triadic Componential Framework and the SSARC model: An instructional design theory of pedagogic task
sequencing. In M. J. Ahmadian & M. Long (Eds.), The
Cambridge handbook of task-based language
teaching (pp. 205–225). Cambridge University Press.
*Robinson, P., Cadierno, P., & Shirai, Y. (2009). Time
and motion: Measuring the effects of the conceptual demands of tasks on second language speech
production. Applied
Linguistics, 30(4), 533–554.
Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R. (2007). Task
complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language learning and
performance. IRAL-Interview Review of Applied
Linguistics, 45(3), 161–176.
Rosenthal, R. (1979). The
file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological
Bulletin, 86(3), 638–641.
Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1986). Meta-analytic
procedures for combining studies with multiple effect sizes. Psychological
Bulletin, 99(3), 400–406.
**Rostamian, M., Fazilatfar, A. M., & Jabbari, A. A. (2018). The
effect of planning time on cognitive processes, monitoring behavior, and quality of L2
writing. Language Teaching
Research, 22(4), 418–438.
**Roussel, S., & Galan, J.-P. (2018). Can
clicker use support learning in a dual-focused second language German course? Language Learning
&
Technology, 22(3), 45–64.
Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). The
effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the
research. In J. M. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing
research on language learning and
teaching (pp. 133–164). John Benjamins.
**Sadeghi, K., & Mosalli, Z. (2012). The
effect of task complexity on fluency and lexical complexity of EFL learners’ argumentative
writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English
Literature, 1(4), 53–65.
**Saeedi, M., & Kazerooni, S. R. (2014). The
influence of task repetition and task structure on EFL learners’ oral narrative
retellings. Innovation in Language Learning and
Teaching, 8(2), 116–131.
*Salimi, A. (2015). The
effect of focus on form and task complexity on L2 learners’ oral task performance. Advances in
Language and Literary
Studies, 6(6), 54–62.
*Salmani-Nodoushan, M. A. (2007). Are
task type and familiarity predictors of performance on tests of language for specific
purposes? Asian ESP
Journal, 3(1), 67–96.
**Sample, E., & Michel, M. (2014). An
exploratory study into trade-off effects of complexity, accuracy, and fluency on young learners’ oral task
repetition. TESL Canada
Journal, 31(8), 3123–3146.
Samuda, V., Van den Branden, K., & Bygate, M. (Eds.). (2018). TBLT
as a researched pedagogy. John Benjamins.
**Sánchez, A. J., Manchón, R. M., & Gilabert, R. (2020). The
effects of task repetition across modalities and proficiency
levels. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Learning
language through task
repetition (pp. 121–143). John Benjamins.
*Sanguran, J. (2005). The
effects of focusing on meaning and form in strategic
planning. In R. Ellis (Ed.) Planning
and task performance in a second
language (pp. 111–141). John Benjamins.
**Santos, S. (2018). Effects
of task complexity on the oral production of Chinese learners of Portuguese as a foreign
language. Journal of the European Second Language
Association, 2(1), 49–62.
*Sasaki, M. (2000). Effects
of cultural schemata on students’ test-taking processes for cloze tests: A multiple data source
approach. Language
Testing, 17(1), 85–114.
**Sasayama, S. (2011). Cognition
Hypothesis and second language performance: Comparison of written and oral task
performance. Second Language
Studies, 29(2), 107–129.
Sasayama, S. (2015). Validating
the assumed relationship between task design, cognitive complexity, and second language task
performance (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Georgetown University.
Sasayama, S. (2016). Is
a ‘complex’ task really complex? Validating the assumption of cognitive task complexity. The
Modern Language
Journal, 100(1), 231–254.
Sasayama, S. (2021). Why
task? Task as a unit of analysis for language education. In M. Long & M. J. Ahmadian (Eds.), The
Cambridge handbook of Task-Based Language
Teaching (pp. 55–72). Cambridge University Press.
*Sasayama, S., & Izumi, S. (2012). Effects
of task complexity and pre-task planning on EFL learners’ oral
production. In A. Shehadeh & C. Coombe (Eds.), Task-based
language teaching in foreign language contexts: Research and
implementation (pp. 23–42). John Benjamins.
*Sasayama, S., & Norris, J. (2019). Unravelling
cognitive task complexity. In Z. Wen & M. J. Ahmadian (Eds.), Researching
L2 task performance and pedagogy: In honour of Peter
Skehan (pp. 95–132). John Benjamins.
Sasayama, S., & Norris, J. M. (2022). Designing
speaking tasks for different assessment goals: The complex relationship between cognitive task complexity, language
performance, and task accomplishment. TASK: Journal on Task-Based Language Teaching and
Learning, 2(2), 184–217.
**Sattarpour, S., & Farrokhi, F. (2017). Exploring
the interplay of planning time, reasoning demands, and language learning aptitude in Iranian EFL learners’ written
production. The Journal of Asia
TEFL, 14(4), 736–754.
**Seyyedi, K., Ismail, S. M., Orang, M., & Nejad, M. S. (2013). The
effect of pre-task planning time on L2 learners’ narrative writing performance. English
Language
Teaching, 6(12), 1–10.
**Shadiev, R., Hwang, W., Huang, Y., & Liu, T. (2015). The
impact of supported and annotated mobile learning on achievement and cognitive
load. Educational Technology &
Society, 18(4), 53–69.
*Shafaei, A., Salimi, A., & Talebi, Z. (2013). The
impact of gender and strategic pre-task planning time on EFL learners’ oral performance in terms of
accuracy. Journal of Language Teaching and
Research, 4(4), 746–753.
**Shajeri, E., & Izadpanah, S. (2016). The
impact of task complexity along single task dimension on Iranian EFL learners’ writing
production. Theory and Practice in Language
Studies, 6(5), 935–945.
Shehadeh, A. (1999). Non-native
speakers’ production of modified comprehensible output and second language learning. Language
Learning, 49(4), 627–675.
**Sheppard, C., & Ellis, R. (2018). The
effects of awareness-raising through stimulated recall on the repeated performance of the same task and on a new task of the
same type. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Learning
language through task
repetition (pp. 171–192). John Benjamins.
**Shiau, Y. S., & Adams, R. (2011). The
effects of increasing reasoning demands on accuracy and complexity in L2 oral
production. University of Sydney Papers in
TESOL, 6, 121–146.
Shintani, N. (2018). Mediating
input-based tasks for beginner learners through task repetition: A sociocultural
perspective. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Learning
language through task
repetition (pp. 255–278). John Benjamins.
Skehan, P. (1996). A
Framework for the Implementation of Task-based Instruction. Applied
Linguistics, 17(1), 38–62.
Skehan, P. (2009a). Models
of speaking and the assessment of second language
proficiency. In A. Benati (Ed.), Issues
in second language
proficiency (pp. 202–215). Continuum.
Skehan, P. (2009b). Modelling
second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied
Linguistics, 30, 510–532.
Skehan, P. (Ed.). (2014). Processing
perspectives on task performance. John Benjamins.
Skehan, P. (2015). Limited
attention capacity and cognition: Two hypotheses regarding second language performance on
tasks. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Domains
and directions in the development of TBLT: A decade of plenaries from the international
conference (pp. 123–156). John Benjamins.
Skehan, P. (2016). Tasks
versus conditions: Two perspectives on task research and their implications for
pedagogy. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 36, 34–49.
*Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task
type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language
Teaching
Research, 1(3), 185–211.
**Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The
influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language
Learning, 49(1), 93–120.
*Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2005). Strategic
and on-line planning: The influence of surprise information and task time on second language
performance. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning
and task performance in a second
language (pp. 193–216). John Benjamins.
*Skehan, P., & Shum, S. (2014). Structure
and processing condition in video-based narrative retelling. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing
perspectives on task
performance (pp. 187–210). John Benjamins.
Slavin, R. E. (1986). Best-evidence synthesis: An
alternative to meta-analytic and traditional reviews. Educational
Researcher, 15(9), 5–11.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Best
evidence synthesis: An intelligent alternative to meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical
Epidemiology, 48(1), 9–18.
**Solon, M., Long, A. Y., & Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2016). Task
complexity, language-related episodes, and production of L2 Spanish vowels. Studies in Second
Language
Acquisition, 39(2), 347–380.
*Soltanpour, F., Valizadeh, M., & Gfhafarianzirak, F. (2018). Feedback-mediated
individual and collaborative planning: Effects on structural organization and clarity of argumentative
essays. Journal on English Language
Teaching, 8(2), 14–26.
**Song, B. (2017). Effects
of task repetition and self-reflection on EFL learners’ attentional allocation and
speaking. English
Teaching, 72(4), 81–103.
*Specht, A. L., & D’Ely, R. C. S. F. (2017). Planning
oral narrative tasks: Optimizing strategic planning condition through strategy
instruction. Acta Scientiarum Language and
Culture, 39(2), 203–212.
Spinner, P., & Gass, S. M. (2019). Using
judgments in second language acquisition research. Routledge.
*Storch, N., & Aldosari, A. (2010). Learners’
use of first language (Arabic) in pair work in an EFL class. Language Teaching
Research, 14(4), 355–375.
*Suzuki, Y. (2021). Optimizing
fluency training for speaking skills transfer: Comparing the effects of blocked and interleaved task
repetition. Language
Learning, 71(2), 285–325. [First published online in
2020]
Swain, M. (1998). Focus
on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus
on form in classroom second language
acquisition (pp. 64–82). Cambridge University Press.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive
load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive
Science, 12, 257–285.
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive
load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and
Instruction, 4, 295–312.
Sweller, J. (2010). Element
interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology
Review, 22, 123–138.
Sweller, J. (2023). The
development of Cognitive Load Theory: Replication crises and incorporation of other theories lead to theory
expansion. Educational Psychology
Review, 35(95).
Sweller, J. (2024). Cognitive
load theory and individual differences. Learning and Individual
Differences, 110.
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive
architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology
Review, 10, 251–296.
*Taguchi, N. (2007). Task
difficulty in oral speech act production. Applied
Linguistics, 28(1), 113–135.
Tajima, M. (2003). The
effects of planning on oral performance of Japanese as a foreign language (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). Purdue University.
*Tavakoli, P. (2009). Assessing
L2 task performance: Understanding effects of task
design. System, 37(3), 482–495.
*Tavakoli, P., & Foster, P. (2008). Task
design and second language performance: The effect of narrative type on learner
output. Language
Learning, 58(2), 439–473.
**Tavakoli, P., & Skehan, P. (2005). Strategic
planning, task structure, and performance testing. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning
and task performance in a second
language (pp. 239–273). John Benjamins.
Taylor, A., Stevens, J., & Asher, J. (2006). The
effects of explicit reading strategy training on L2 reading comprehension: A
meta-analysis. In J. M. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing
research on language learning and
teaching (pp. 213–244). John Benjamins.
**Ting, S. (1996). Planning
time, modality and second language task performance: Accuracy and fluency in the acquisition of Chinese as a second
language. University of Queensland Working Papers in Language and
Linguistics, 1(1), 31–64.
Tomlin, R. (1984). The
treatment of foreground-background information in the on-line descriptive discourse of second language
learner. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 6, 115–142.
*Trebits, A. (2016). Sources
of individual differences in L2 narrative production: The contribution of input, processing, and output
anxiety. Applied
Linguistics, 37(2), 155–174.
*Trites, L., & McGroarty, M. (2005). Reading
to learn and reading to integrate: New tasks for reading comprehension tests? Language
Testing, 22(2), 174–210.
*Türk, E., & Erçetin, G. (2014). Effects
of interactive versus simultaneous display of multimedia glosses on L2 reading comprehension and incidental vocabulary
learning. Computer Assisted Language
Learning, 27(1), 1–25.
*Urwin, J. (1996). Prior
knowledge, pretasks and second language listening comprehension. University of Queensland
Working Papers in Language and
Linguistics, 1(1), 65–94.
*Urwin, J., & Robinson, P. (1999). The
effects of pre-listening task complexity on reception and
processing. In N. Jungheim & P. Robinson (Eds.), Pragmatics
and pedagogy: Proceedings of the third Pacific Second Research
Forum (Vol. 2, pp. 135–142). The Pacific Second Language Research Forum.
Van den Branden, K. (2016). The
role of teachers in task-based language education. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 36, 164–181.
Van den Noortgate, W., López-López, J. A., Marín-Martínez, F., & Sánchez-Meca, J. (2015). Meta-analysis
of multiple outcomes: A multilevel approach. Behavior Research
Methods, 47, 1274–1294.
Van Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2008). Instructional
efficiency: Revisiting the original construct in educational research. Educational
Psychologist, 43, 16–26.
Van Merriënboer, J. J., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking
the load off a learner’s mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational
Psychologist, 38(1), 5–13.
Van Merriënboer, J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive
load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational
Psychology
Review, 17, 147–177.
Van Merriënboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive
load theory in health professional education: Design principles and strategies. Medical
Education, 44(1), 85–93.
VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending
to form and content in the input. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 12, 287–301.
VanPatten, B. (1993). Grammar
instruction for the acquisition rich classroom. Foreign Language
Annals, 26, 433–450.
Van Waes, L., Leijten, M., & Quinlan, T. (2010). Reading
during sentence composing and error correction: A multilevel analysis of the influences of task
complexity. Reading and
Writing, 23(7), 803–834.
Vasylets, O., & Gilabert, R. (2021). Task
effects across modalities. In R. Manchón & C. Polio (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and
writing (pp. 39–51). Routledge.
**Vasylets, O., Gilabert, R., & Manchón, R. M. (2017). The
effects of mode and task complexity on second language production. Language
Learning, 67(2), 394–430.
**Vasylets, O., Gilabert, R., & Manchón, R. M. (2020). Task
modality, communicative adequacy and CAF measures: The moderating role of task
complexity. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Writing
and language learning: Advancing research
agendas (pp. 183–206). John Benjamins.
Vasylets, O., Mellado, M. D., Plonsky, L. (2022). The
role of cognitive individual differences in digital versus pen-and-paper writing. Studies in
Second Language Learning and
Teaching, 12(4), 721–743.
Wade, C. A., Turner, H. M., Rothstein, H. R., & Lavenberg, J. G. (2006). Information
retrieval and the role of the information specialist in producing high-quality systematic reviews in the social, behavioural
and education sciences. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and
Practice, 2(1), 89–108.
*Wang, S. Y. (2018). Task
complexity and media of L2 reading affecting Chinese intermediate EFL
learners. Multimedia-Assisted Language
Learning, 21(4), 211–230.
*Wang, Z. (2014). On-line
time pressure manipulations: L2 speaking performance under five types of planning and repetition
conditions. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing
perspectives on task
performance (pp. 27–62). John Benjamins.
**Wang, Z., & Chen, G. (2018). Discourse
performance in L2 task repetition. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Learning
language through task
repetition (pp. 97–116). John Benjamins.
Wang, C., & Pape, E. J. (2007). A
probe into three Chinese boys’ self-efficacy beliefs learning English as a second
language. Journal of Research in Childhood
Education, 21(4), 364–377.
*Wang, Z., & Skehan, P. (2014). Structure,
lexis, and time perspective: Influences on task performance. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing
perspectives on task
performance (pp. 155–186). John Benjamins.
**Wang, Z., Skehan, P., & Chen, G. (2020). The
effects of hybrid online planning and L2 proficiency on video-based speaking task
performance. Instructed Second Language
Acquisition, 3(1), 53–80.
*Wen, Z. (2016). Phonological
and executive working memory in L2 task-based speech planning and performance. The Language
Learning
Journal, 44(4), 418–435.
Wendel, J. N. (1997). Planning
and second language narrative production (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Temple University.
Wickens, C. D. (1976). The
effects of divided attention on information processing in manual tracking. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance, 2(1), 1–13.
Wickens, C. D. (1980). The
structure of attentional resources. Attention and Performance
VIII, 8, 239–257.
Wickens, C. D. (1984). Processing
resources in attention. In R. Parasuraman & D. Davies (Eds.), Varieties
of
attention (pp. 63–102). Academic Press.
Wickens, C. D. (2002). Multiple
resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics
Science, 3, 159–177.
Wickens, C. D. (2007). Attention
to the second language. International Review of Applied
Linguistics, 45, 177–191.
*Wigglesworth, G. (1997). An
investigation of planning time and proficiency level on oral test discourse. Language
Testing, 14(1), 85–106.
*Wigglesworth, G. (1998). The
effect of planning time on second language test discourse. In A. J. Kunnan (Ed.), Validation
in language
assessment (pp. 91–110). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
*Wigglesworth, G. (2000). Issues
in the development of oral tasks for competency-based assessments of second language
performance. In G. Brindley (Ed.), Studies
in immigrant English language
assessment (Vol. 1, pp. 81–125). National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.
*Wigglesworth, G., & Elder, C. (2010). An
investigation of the effectiveness and validity of planning time in speaking test
tasks. Language Assessment
Quarterly, 7(1), 1–24.
Wolfe, J. (1978). The
effects of game complexity on the acquisition of business policy knowledge. Decision
Sciences, 9(1), 143–155.
Wolfe, J., & Box, T. M. (1988). Team
cohesion effects on business game performance. Simulation &
Games, 19(1), 82–98.
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H.-Y. (1998). Second
language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. University of Hawaii Press.
Wood, R. E. (1986). Task
complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 37(1), 60–82.
Wood, R. E., Mento, A. J., & Locke, E. A. (1987). Task
complexity as a moderator of goal effects: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 72(3), 416–425.
*Woodall, B. (2002). Language-switching:
Using the first language while writing in a second language. Journal of Second Language
Writing, 11(1), 7–28.
*Wu, X., Lowyck, J., Sercu, L., & Elen, J. (2013). Task
complexity, student perceptions of vocabulary learning in EFL, and task performance. British
Journal of Educational
Psychology, 83(1), 160–181.
*Xi, X. (2005). Do
visual chunks and planning impact performance on the graph description task in the SPEAK
exam? Language
Testing, 22(4), 463–508.
*Xi, X. (2010). Aspects
of performance on line graph description tasks: Influenced by graph familiarity and different task
features. Language
Testing, 27(1), 73–100.
Xing, J., & Luo, S. (2015). The
effects of task complexity on Chinese learners’ language production: A synthesis and
meta-analysis. Applied Research on English
Language 4(2), 96–109.
**Xing, J., & Luo, S. (2019). The
effects of reasoning demands on Chinese EFL learners’ oral performance and cognitive
processes. In Z. Wen & M. J. Ahmadian (Eds.), Researching
L2 task performance and pedagogy: In honour of Peter
Skehan (pp. 153–182). John Benjamins.
*Yaghoubi-Notash, M., & Yousefi, M. H. (2011). Uptake
in task-elicited L2 performance: Can task complexity matter? Journal of Language Teaching and
Research, 2(3), 508–516.
**Yang, H. (2014). Does
multimedia support individual differences? EFL learners’ listening comprehension and cognitive
load. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 30(6), 699–713.
**Yang, H. (2018). The
effects of attention cueing on English reading on mobile phones. Frontiers of Education in
China, 13(3), 315–345.
*Yang, W., Lu, X., & Weigle, S. C. (2015). Different
topics, different discourse: Relationships among writing topic, measures of syntactic complexity, and judgments of writing
quality. Journal of Second Language
Writing, 28, 53–67.
*Yousefi, M. H., & Afghari, A. (2012). Task-generated
interaction, cognitive complexity and self-repair. Cypriot Journal of Educational
Sciences, 7(2), 75–81.
Yu, Q. (2021). An
organic syntactic complexity measure for the Chinese language: The TC-unit. Applied
Linguistics, 42(1), 60–92.
*Yuan, F., & Ellis, R. (2003). The
effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral
production. Applied
Linguistics, 24(1), 1–27.
**Zalbidea, J. (2017). ‘One
task fits all’? The roles of task complexity, modality, and working memory capacity in L2
performance. The Modern Language
Journal, 101(2), 335–352.
Zheng, Y., Lu, Y., Wang, Z., Huang, D., & Fu, S. (2015). Developing
a measurement for task complexity in flight. Aerospace Medicine and Human
Performance, 86(8), 698–704.
*Zhigang, M., & Xudong, W. (2008). Interpreting
performance under different task-planning
conditions. Babel, 54(3), 201–233.