Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study reviewed conceptualizations and operationalizations of second language (L2) listening constructs. A total of 157 peer-reviewed papers published in 19 journals in applied linguistics were coded for (1) publication year, author, source title, location, language, and reliability and (2) listening subskills, cognitive processes, attributes, and listening functions potentially measured or investigated. Only 39 publications (24.84%) provided theoretical definitions for listening constructs, 38 of which were general or had a narrow construct coverage. Listening functions such as discriminative, empathetic, and analytical listening were largely unattended to in construct conceptualization in the studies. In addition, we identified 24 subskills, 27 cognitive processes, and 54 listening attributes (total = 105) operationalized in the studies. We developed a multilayered framework to categorize these features. The subskills and cognitive processes were categorized into five principal groups each (10 groups total), while the attributes were divided into three main groups. This multicomponential framework will be useful in construct delineation and operationalization in L2 listening assessment and teaching. Finally, limitations of the extant research and future directions for research and development in L2 listening assessment are discussed.

Keywords

Construct definition construct operationalization listening assessment listening comprehension multimodality process-based listening second language second language listening subskill

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aben

Stapert

Blokland

(2012). About the distinction between working memory and short-term memory. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, Article 301. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00301

Alderson

(2010). “Cognitive diagnosis and Q-matrices in language assessment”: A commentary. Language Assessment Quarterly, 7(1), 96–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300903426748

Alderson

Kremmel

(2013). Re-examining the content validation of a grammar test: The (im)possibility of distinguishing vocabulary and structural knowledge. Language Testing, 30(4), 535–556. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532213489568

*Al-Jasser

(2008). The effect of teaching English phonotactics on the lexical segmentation of English as a foreign language. System, 36(1), 94–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.12.002

*Al-Musalli

A. M.

(2015). Taxonomy of lecture note-taking skills and subskills. International Journal of Listening, 29(3), 134–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2015.1011643

Alptekin

Erçetin

(2010). The role of L1 and L2 working memory in literal and inferential comprehension in L2 reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 33(2), 206–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01412.x

Anderson

J. R.

(1995). Cognitive psychology and its implications (4th Ed.). Freeman.

Andringa

Olsthoorn

van Beuningen

Schoonen

Hulstijn

(2012). Determinants of success in native and non-native listening comprehension: An individual differences approach. Language Learning, 62(S2), 49–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00706.x

Aryadoust

(2023). The vexing problem of validity and the future of second language assessment. Language Testing, 40(1), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322221125204

10.

Aryadoust

(2020). A review of comprehension subskills: A Scientometrics perspective. System, 88, Article 102180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.102180

11.

Aryadoust

Foo

(2023). An eye-tracking investigation of visual search strategies and test performance of L1 and L2 listening test takers. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 18(9), 1–26. http://rptel.apsce.net/index.php/RPTEL/article/view/2023-18009

12.

Aryadoust

Foo

L. Y.

(2022). What can gaze behaviors, neuroimaging data, and test scores tell us about test method effects and cognitive load in listening assessments? Language Testing, 39(1), 56–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322211026876

13.

*Aryadoust

Goh

Kim

(2011). An investigation of differential item functioning in the MELAB listening test. Language Assessment Quarterly, 8(4), 361–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.628632

14.

Baddeley

A. D.

(2000). Short-term and working memory. In Tulving

Craik

F. I. M.

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 77–92). Oxford University Press.

15.

Badger

White

Sutherland

Haggis

(2001). Note perfect: An investigation of how students view taking notes in lectures. System, 29(3), 405–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00028-8

16.

*Batty

A. O.

(2015). A comparison of video-and audio-mediated listening tests with many-facet Rasch modeling and differential distractor functioning. Language Testing, 32(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214531254

17.

Bejar

Douglas

Jamieson

Nissan

Turner

(2000). TOEFL 2000 listening framework: A working paper (TOEFL Monograph Series, MA-19). Educational Testing Service. https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RM-00-07-Bejar.pdf

18.

*Bekleyen

(2009). Helping teachers become better English students: Causes, effects, and coping strategies for foreign language listening anxiety. System, 37(4), 664–675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.09.010

19.

Bodie

G. D.

Worthington

Imhof

Cooper

L. O.

(2008). What would a unified field of listening look like? A proposal linking past perspectives and future endeavors. The International Journal of Listening, 22(2), 103–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904010802174867

20.

Bostrom

R. N.

(1996). Memory, cognitive processing, and the process of “listening” a reply to Thomas and Levine. Human Communication Research, 23(2), 298–305. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00396.x

21.

*Bozorgian

(2014). The role of metacognition in the development of EFL learners’ listening skill. International Journal of Listening, 28(3), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2013.861303

22.

Broadbent

D. E.

(1958). Perception and communication. Pergamon Press.

23.

*Brunfaut

Révész

(2015). The role of task and listener characteristics in second language listening. TESOL Quarterly, 49(1), 141–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.168

24.

*Buck

(1994). The appropriacy of psychometric measurement models for testing second language listening comprehension. Language Testing, 11(2), 145–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229401100204

25.

Buck

(2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge University Press.

26.

*Buck

Tatsuoka

(1998). Application of the rule-space procedure to language testing: Examining attributes of a free response listening test. Language Testing, 15(2), 119–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229801500201

27.

Burleson

B. R.

(2011). A constructivist approach to listening. The International Journal of Listening, 25(1–2), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2011.536470

28.

*Cai

(2013). Partial dictation as a measure of EFL listening proficiency: Evidence from confirmatory factor analysis. Language Testing, 30(2), 177–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532212456833

29.

*Call

M. E.

(1985). Auditory short-term memory, listening comprehension, and the input hypothesis. TESOL Quarterly, 19(4), 765–781. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586675

30.

*Campfield

D. E.

Murphy

V. A.

(2014). Elicited imitation in search of the influence of linguistic rhythm on child L2 acquisition. System, 42, 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.002

31.

Carroll

D. W.

(2008). Psychology of language (5th ed.). Thomson/Wadsworth.

32.

*Chou

M.-H.

(2017). A task-based language teaching approach to developing metacognitive strategies for listening comprehension. International Journal of Listening, 31(1), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2015.1098542

33.

Cohen

Lefebvre

(2005). Handbook of categorization in cognitive science. Elsevier.

34.

Conway

A. R.

Kane

M. J.

Bunting

M. F.

Hambrick

D. Z.

Wilhelm

Engle

R. W.

(2005). Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(5), 769–786. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196772

35.

Cooper

(2015). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach (Vol. 2). SAGE.

36.

Corey

Benson

D. H.

(2016). Audio production and critical listening: Technical ear training. Routledge.

37.

Cross

(2011a). Comprehending news videotexts: The influence of the visual content. Language Learning & Technology, 15(2), 44–68. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/894f7233-146f-4f76-be0f-7786867c6e74/content

38.

*Cross

(2011b). Social-cultural-historical contradictions in an L2 listening lesson: A joint activity system analysis. Language Learning, 61(3), 820–867. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00658.x

39.

Cubilo

Winke

(2013). Redefining the L2 listening construct within an integrated writing task: Considering the impacts of visual-cue interpretation and note-taking. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10(4), 371–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2013.824972

40.

Cumming

(2013). Assessing integrated writing tasks for academic purposes: Promises and perils. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.622016

41.

*Dahl

T. I.

Ludvigsen

(2014). How I see what you’re saying: The role of gestures in native and foreign language listening comprehension. Modern Language Journal, 98(3), 813–833. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12124.x

42.

*Dai

D. W.

Roever

(2019). Including L2-English varieties in listening tests for adolescent ESL learners: L1 effects and learner perceptions. Language Assessment Quarterly, 16(1), 64–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2019.1601198

43.

Daneman

Merikle

P. M.

(1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3(4), 422–433. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/BF03214546.pdf

44.

*Dewaard

(2012). Learner perception of formal and informal pronouns in Russian. The Modern Language Journal, 96(3), 400–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01355.x

45.

Dunkel

Henning

Chaudron

(1993). The assessment of an L2 listening comprehension construct: A tentative model for test specification and development. The Modern Language Journal, 77(2), 180–191. https://doi.org/10.2307/328942

46.

Eom

(2006). An investigation of operationalized constructs of second language listening tests. The University of Iowa.

47.

Eom

(2008). Underlying factors of MELAB listening construct (Spaan Fellow working papers in second or foreign language assessment No. 6, 77–94). English Language Institute, University of Michigan. https://michiganassessment.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/20.02.pdf.Res_.UnderlyingFactorsofMELABListeningConstructs.pdf

48.

Ericsson

K. A.

Kintsch

(1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102(2), 211–245. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.2.211

49.

Field

(2004). An insight into listeners’ problems: Too much bottom-up or too much top-down? System, 32(3), 363–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.05.002

50.

Field

(2008). Listening in the language classroom. Cambridge University Press.

51.

Field

(2012). The cognitive validity of the lecture-based question in the IELTS listening paper. In Taylor

Weir

C. J.

(Eds.), IELTS collected papers 2: Research in reading and listening assessment (pp. 391–453). Cambridge University Press.

52.

Field

(2013). Cognitive validity. In Geranpayeh

Taylor

(Eds.), Examining listening: Research and practice in assessing second language listening (Studies in Language Testing 35, pp. 77–151). UCLES/Cambridge University Press.

53.

Fincher-Kiefer

(2001). Perceptual components of situation models. Memory & Cognition, 29, 336–343. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194928

54.

Fitch-Hauser

Hughes

M. A.

(1992). The conceptualization and measurement of listening. International Journal of Listening, 6(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.1992.10499105

55.

Forster

K. I.

(1979). Levels of processing and the structure of the language processor. In Cooper

W. E.

Walker

E. C. T.

(Eds.), Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett (pp. 27–85). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

56.

Frauenfelder

Tyler

(Eds.) (1987). Spoken word recognition. MIT Press / Bradford Books.

57.

Furuya

(2021). How do listening comprehension processes differ by second language proficiency? Top-down and bottom-up perspectives. International Journal of Listening, 35(2), 123–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2019.1694411

58.

Gao

Rogers

(2011). Use of tree-based regression in the analyses of L2 reading test items. Language Testing, 28(1), 77–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532210364380

59.

Geranpayeh

Taylor

(2013). Examining listening: Research and practice in assessing second language listening (Vol. 35). Cambridge University Press.

60.

*Ginther

(2002). Context and content visuals and performance on listening comprehension stimuli. Language Testing, 19(2), 133–167. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532202lt225oa

61.

Glenn

E. C.

(1989). A content analysis of fifty definitions of listening. International Journal of Listening, 3(1), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1932586xijl0301_3

62.

Goh

C. C.

(1998). How ESL learners with different listening abilities use comprehension strategies and tactics. Language Teaching Research, 2(2), 124–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216889800200203

63.

*Goh

C. C.

(2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners’ listening comprehension problems. System, 28(1), 55–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00060-3

64.

*Goh

C. C.

Aryadoust

(2015). Examining the notion of listening subskill divisibility and its implications for second language listening. International Journal of Listening, 29(3), 109–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2014.936119

65.

*Gorsuch

G. J.

(2001). Testing textbook theories and tests: The case of suprasegmentals in a pronunciation textbook. System, 29(1), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(00)00049-X

66.

*Graham

C. R.

Williams

J. N.

(2018). Implicit learning of Latin stress regularities. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40(1), 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263116000371

67.

*Grohe

A. K.

Weber

(2016). Learning to comprehend foreign-accented speech by means of production and listening training. Language Learning, 66(S2), 187–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12174

68.

Yan

(2010). Interactive listening: Construct definition and operationalization in Tests of English as a Foreign Language. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 33(6). https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/11444741/interactive-listening-construct-definition-and-operationalization-in-

69.

*Hale

G. A.

Courtney

. (1994). The effects of note-taking on listening comprehension in the Test of English as a Foreign Language. Language Testing, 11(1), 29–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229401100104

70.

*Harding

(2012). Accent, listening assessment and the potential for a shared-L1 advantage: A DIF perspective. Language Testing, 29(2), 163–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532211421161

71.

*Harper

A. G.

(1985). Academic listening comprehension: Does the sum of the parts make up the whole? TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 609–612. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586283

72.

*He

Chen

(2017). Developing common listening ability scales for Chinese learners of English. Language Testing in Asia, 7(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-017-0033-4

73.

Jiang

(2020). Assessing second language listening over the past twenty years: A review within the socio-cognitive framework. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 2123. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02123

74.

Holzknecht

McCray

Eberharter

Kremmel

Zehentner

Spiby

Dunlea

(2021). The effect of response order on candidate viewing behaviour and item difficulty in a multiple-choice listening test. Language Testing, 38(1), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532220917316

75.

Hulstijn

J. H.

(2011). Language proficiency in native and nonnative speakers: An agenda for research and suggestions for second-language assessment. Language Assessment Quarterly, 8(3), 229–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.565844

76.

Janusik

L. A.

(2007). Building listening theory: The validation of the conversational listening span. Communication Studies, 58(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510970701341089

77.

Jongman

Wang

Kim

B. H.

(2003). Contributions of semantic and facial information to perception of nonsibilant fricatives. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46(6), 1367–1377. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2003/106)

78.

*Joyce

(2013). Word recognition processing efficiency as a component of second language listening. International Journal of Listening, 27(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2013.732407

79.

Kang

Arvizu

M. N. G.

Chaipuapae

Lesnov

R. O.

(2019). Reviews of academic English listening tests for non-native speakers. International Journal of Listening, 33(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2016.1185210

80.

Kho

S. Q. E.

Aryadoust

Foo

(2022). An eye-tracking investigation of the keyword-matching strategy in listening assessment. Education and Information Technologies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11322-y

81.

Kiewra

K. A.

(1984). Implications for notetaking based on relationships between notetaking variables and achievement measures. Reading Improvement, 21(2), Article 145. https://www.proquest.com/docview/1994306265

82.

*Kim

Tracy-Ventura

Jung

(2016). A measure of proficiency or short-term memory? Validation of an elicited imitation test for SLA research. The Modern Language Journal, 100(3), 655–673. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12346

83.

*Kimura

(2017). Foreign language listening anxiety: A self-presentational view. International Journal of Listening, 31(3), 142–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2016.1222909

84.

Kintsch

(1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.

85.

Kormos

Sáfár

(2008). Phonological short-term memory, working memory and foreign language performance in intensive language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(2), 261–271. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728908003416

86.

*Lam

O’Brien

(2014). Perceptual dialectology in second language learners of German. System, 46, 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.08.006

87.

Lee

Prior

(2013). Developing therapeutic listening. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 41(2), 91–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069885.2012.705816

88.

Lee

Y.-W.

Sawaki

(2009). Application of three cognitive diagnosis models to ESL reading and listening assessments. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(3), 239–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300903079562

89.

Low

A. R. L.

Aryadoust

(2021). Investigating test-taking strategies in listening assessment: A comparative study of eye-tracking and self-report questionnaires. International Journal of Listening. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2021.1883433

90.

Lynch

(2010). Listening: Sources, skills, and strategies. In Kaplan

(Ed.), Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp. 74–87). Oxford University Press.

91.

Lynch

Mendelsohn

(2013). Listening. In Schmitt

(Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 190–206). Routledge.

92.

Marslen-Wilson

Welsh

(1978). Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech. Cognitive Psychology, 10(1), 29–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(78)90018-X

93.

*Matsuura

Chiba

Mahoney

Rilling

(2014). Accent and speech rate effects in English as a lingua franca. System, 46, 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.07.015

94.

McCray

Brunfaut

(2018). Investigating the construct measured by banked gap-fill items: Evidence from eye-tracking. Language Testing, 35(1), 51–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532216677105

95.

Min

Cai

(2022). Application of bi-factor MIRT and higher-order CDM models to an in-house EFL listening test for diagnostic purposes. Language Assessment Quarterly, 19(2), 189–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2021.1980571

96.

Min

(2022). Developing individualized feedback for listening assessment: Combining standard setting and cognitive diagnostic assessment approaches. Language Testing, 39(1), 90–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532221995475

97.

Mislevy

R. J.

(2009). Validity from the perspective of model-based reasoning (CRESST Report No. 752). National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED507085.pdf

98.

Morton

(1982). Disintegrating the lexicon: An information processing approach. In Mehler

Franck

Walker

E. C. T.

Garrett

(Eds.), Perspectives on mental representation (pp. 89–109). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

99.

Muhayimana

Kwizera

Nyirahabimana

M. R.

(2022). Using Bloom’s taxonomy to evaluate the cognitive levels of Primary Leaving English Exam questions in Rwandan schools. Curriculum Perspectives, 42(1), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-021-00156-2

100.

Munby

(1978). Communicative syllabus design: A sociolinguistic model for designing the content of purpose-specific language programmes. Cambridge University Press.

101.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019). Reproducibility and replicability in science. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25303

102.

*Nejad

Farvardin

(2022). Roles of general language proficiency, aural vocabulary knowledge, and metacognitive awareness in L2 learners’ listening comprehension. International Journal of Listening, 36(3), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2019.1572510

103.

*Nix

J.-M. L.

Tseng

W.-T.

(2014). Towards the measurement of EFL listening beliefs with item response theory methods. International Journal of Listening, 28(2), 112–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2013.872990

104.

*Ockey

(2007). Construct implications of including still image or video in computer-based listening tests. Language Testing, 24(4), 517–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532207080771

105.

Olmos

O. L.

Lusung-Oyzon

M. V. P.

(2008). Effects of prior knowledge and lesson outline on note taking and test scores. Education Quarterly, 66(1). https://www.journals.upd.edu.ph/index.php/edq/article/view/1565

106.

*Park

G.-P.

(2008). Differential item functioning on an English listening test across gender. TESOL Quarterly, 42(1), 115–123. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00212.x

107.

Pearson. (2022). PTE academic test-taker handbook. https://assets.ctfassets.net/yqwtwibiobs4/5ILp5YLd9U4rN1MfLljlgy/825e09c91e4c1638e8636e1cc4cdf333/PTE_Academic_Test_Taker_Handbook_-_May_2022_V2.pdf

108.

Purdy

Borisoff

(Eds.) (1997). Listening in everyday life: A personal and professional approach. University Press of America.

109.

*Rahimirad

Shams

M. R.

(2014). The effect of activating metacognitive strategies on the listening performance and metacognitive awareness of EFL students. International Journal of Listening, 28(3), 162–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2014.902315

110.

Richards

J. C.

(1983). Listening comprehension: Approach, design, procedure. TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 219–240. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586651

111.

Rost

(2015). Teaching and researching listening (3rd ed.). Routledge.

112.

*Seo

(2002). Research note: The effect of visuals on listening comprehension: A study of Japanese learners’ listening strategies. International Journal of Listening, 16(1), 57–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2002.10499049

113.

*Seright

(1985). Age and aural comprehension achievement in francophone adults learning English. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 455–473. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586273

114.

*Shang

(2005). An investigation of cognitive operations on L2 listening comprehension performance: An exploratory study. International Journal of Listening, 19(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2005.10499074

115.

*Shang

(2008). Listening strategy use and linguistic patterns in listening comprehension by EFL learners. International Journal of Listening, 22(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904010701802147

116.

*Shin

(1998). Using videotaped lectures for testing academic listening proficiency. International Journal of Listening, 12(1), 57–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.1998.10499019

117.

*Song

M.-Y.

(2012). Note-taking quality and performance on an L2 academic listening test. Language Testing, 29(1), 67–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532211415379

118.

*Soureshjani

K. H.

(2011). An investigation into the effects of time of administration and language of instruction on Persian language learners’ listening ability. Language Testing in Asia, 1(4), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/2229-0443-1-4-100

119.

*Sueyoshi

Hardison

D. M.

(2005). The role of gestures and facial cues in second language listening comprehension. Language Learning, 55(4), 661–669. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00320.x

120.

*Suvorov

(2015). The use of eye tracking in research on video-based second language (L2) listening assessment: A comparison of context videos and content videos. Language Testing, 32(4), 463–483. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214562099

121.

Suvorov

(2021). Visuals in the assessment and testing of second language listening: A methodological synthesis. International Journal of Listening, 36(2), 80–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2021.1941028

122.

Tafaghodtari

M. H.

Vandergrift

(2008). Second and foreign language listening: Unraveling the construct. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 107(1), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.107.1.99-113

123.

*Takimoto

(2006). The effects of explicit feedback on the development of pragmatic proficiency. Language Teaching Research, 10(4), 393–417. https://doi.org/10.1191%2F1362168806lr198oa

124.

*Tanewong

(2019). Metacognitive pedagogical sequence for less-proficient Thai EFL listeners: A comparative investigation. RELC Journal, 50(1), 86–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688218754942

125.

Taylor

Geranpayeh

(2011). Assessing listening for academic purposes: Defining and operationalising the test construct. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(2), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.03.002

126.

*Tsang

(2019). Reconceptualizing speaking, listening, and pronunciation: Glocalizing TESOL in the contexts of World Englishes and English as a Lingua Franca. TESOL Quarterly, 53(2), 580–588. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.504

127.

Tsui

A. B.

Fullilove

(1998). Bottom-up or top-down processing as a discriminator of L2 listening performance. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 432–451. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.4.432

128.

Vandergrift

(2004). Listening to learn or learning to listen? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190504000017

129.

Vandergrift

(2007). Recent developments in second and foreign language listening comprehension research. Language Teaching, 40(3), 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444807004338

130.

Vandergrift

Goh

C. C.

(2012). Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in action:. Routledge.

131.

Vandergrift

Goh

C. C.

Mareschal

C. J.

Tafaghodtari

M. H.

(2006). The metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire: Development and validation. Language Learning, 56(3), 431–462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00373.x

132.

*Vanderplank

(2019). ‘Gist watching can only take you so far’: Attitudes, strategies and changes in behaviour in watching films with captions. The Language Learning Journal, 47(4), 407–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2019.1610033

133.

*Vincent-Durroux

Poussard

Lavaur

J. M.

Aparicio

(2011). Using CALL in a formal learning context to develop oral language awareness in ESL: An assessment. ReCALL, 23(2), 86–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344011000024

134.

Wagner

(2002). Video listening tests: A pilot study. Studies in Applied Linguistics and TESOL, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.7916/salt.v2i1.1651

135.

Wagner

(2008). Video listening tests: What are they measuring? Language Assessment Quarterly, 5(3), 218–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300802213015

136.

*Wagner

(2010a). Test-takers’ interaction with an L2 video listening test. System, 38(2), 280–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.01.003

137.

*Wagner

(2010b). The effect of the use of video texts on ESL listening test-taker performance. Language Testing, 27(4), 493–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209355668

138.

*Wagner

(2013). An investigation of how the channel of input and access to test questions affect L2 listening test performance. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10(2), 178–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2013.769552

139.

Wallace

M. P.

Lee

(2020). Examining second language listening, vocabulary, and executive functioning. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 1122. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01122

140.

*Weyers

(1999). The effect of authentic video on communicative competence. Modern Language Journal, 83(3), 339–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00026

141.

*Wolfgramm

Suter

Göksel

(2016). Examining the role of concentration, vocabulary and self-concept in listening and reading comprehension. International Journal of Listening, 30(1–2), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2015.1065746

142.

Wolvin

A. D.

Coakley

C. G.

(1996). Listening (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

143.

Worthington

D. L.

Bodie

G. D.

(2018). Defining listening: A historical, theoretical, and pragmatic assessment. In Worthington

D. L.

Bodie

G. D.

(Eds.), The sourcebook of listening research: Methodology and measures (pp. 3–17). John Wiley & Sons.

144.

*Wu

(1998). What do tests of listening comprehension test? A retrospection study of EFL test-takers performing a multiple-choice task. Language Testing, 15(1), 21–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229801500102

145.

Yeldham

(2018). L2 listening instruction: More bottom-up or more top-down? Journal of Asia TEFL, 15(3), 805–810. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2018.15.3.16.805

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.05 MB

The typology of second language listening constructs: A systematic review

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material