Language learners with high working memory capacity have an advantage, all other factors being equal, during the second language acquisition (SLA) process; therefore, identifying a pedagogical intervention that can compensate for low working memory capacity would be advantageous to language learners and instructors. Extensive research on the provision of planning time before non-native speakers complete various oral and written tasks in the target language suggests that planning time might provide the processing support needed to overcome the constraints of low working memory capacity. This article reports on an empirical aptitude-treatment interaction (ATI) study of the interaction of working memory capacity and pre-task planning time with a population of English as a second language (ESL) learners in the USA. Learners were asked to complete two different oral, monologic, picture-guided narratives in two conditions: with pre-task planning time and without pre-task planning time. The results did not show an effect for the interaction of working memory capacity with pre-task planning time; that is, the results demonstrate the facilitative effect of planning time on learner fluency for participants with both high and low working memory capacity. In addition, the results demonstrate that learners with pre-task planning time produce more fluent and more complex speech than learners without pre-task planning time, with mixed results for accuracy. Finally, the results suggest that planning time may have a carry-over effect and benefit the fluency and complexity of learners’ speech during subsequent, unplanned tasks.
AtkinsS.M.HarbisonJ.I.BuntingM.F.Teubner-RhodesS.DoughertyM.R. (2009). Measuring working memory with automated block span and automated letter-number sequencing. Poster presented at the 50th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Boston, MA, USA.
2.
BaddeleyA. (2003). Working memory and language: An overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36, 189–208.
3.
BaddeleyA.HitchG. (1974). Working memory. In BowerG. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47–90). New York: Academic Press.
4.
BaddeleyA.D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory?Trends in Cognitive Science4, 417–423. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2
5.
ChristoffelsI. (2006) Listening while talking: The retention of prose under articulatory suppression in relation to simultaneous interpreting. The European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 18, 206–220.
6.
DanemanM.CarpenterP. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466.
7.
DanemanM.GreenI. (1986). Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(1), 1–18.
8.
DeKeyserR.M. (2007) Introduction: Situating the concept of practice. In DeKeyserR. (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 1–18). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
DeKeyserR.M. (2009). Cognitive-psychological processes in second language learning. In LongM.DoughtyC. (Eds.), The handbook of second language teaching (pp. 119–138). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
10.
DörnyeiZ. (2005). The psychology of the language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
EllisR. (2009). The differential effects of three types of task planning on the fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics, 30, 474–509.
12.
EngleR.W.KaneM.J.TuholskiS.W. (1999). Individual differences in WMC and what they tell us about controlled attention, general fluid intelligence, and functions of the prefrontal cortex. In MiyakeA.ShahP. (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 102–134). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
FosterP.SkehanP. (1996). The influence of planning on performance in task-based learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299–324.
14.
GassS. (1997) Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15.
GilabertR. (2007). The simultaneous manipulation of task complexity along planning time and (+/− Here and Now): Effects on L2 oral production. In Garcia-MayoM. (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 44–68). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
16.
GilabertR.MuñozC. (2010). Differences in attainment and performance of a second language: The role of working memory capacity. International Journal of English Studies, 10, 19–42.
17.
Guará-TavaresM.G. (2009). The relationship among pre-task planning, working memory capacity, and L2 speech performance: A pilot study. Linguagem & Ensino, 12, 165–194.
18.
HarringtonM.SawyerM. (1992). L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 25–38.
19.
IzumiS. (2002). Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis.Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 541–577.
20.
IzumiS. (2003). Comprehension and production processes in second language earning: In search of the psycholinguistic rationale of the output hypothesis.Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 168–196.
21.
JuffsA. (2004). Representation, processing, and working memory in a second language. Transactions of the Philological Society, 102, 199–225.
22.
KaneM.J.ConwayA.R.A.HambrickD.Z.EngleR.W. (2007). Variation in WMC as variation in executive attention & control. In ConwayA.R.A.JarroldC.KaneM.J.MiyakeA.TowseJ.N. (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 21–48). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23.
KaneM.J.HambrickD.Z.TuholskiS.W.WilhelmO.PayneT.W.EngleR.W. (2004). The generality of working memory capacity: A latent-variable approach to verbal and visuospatial memory span and reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 189–217.
24.
KawauchiC. (2005). The effects of strategic planning on the oral narratives of learners with low and high intermediate proficiency. In EllisR. (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 143–164). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.
25.
KormosJ.SáfárA. (2008). Phonological short-term memory, working memory and foreign language performance in intensive language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 261–271.
26.
MackeyA.PhilpJ.EgiT.FujiiA.TatsumiT. (2002). Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback, and L2 development. In RobinsonP. (Ed.) Individual differences and instructed second language learning (pp. 181–209). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
27.
MehnertU. (1998). The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 52–83.
28.
MochizukiN.OrtegaL. (2008). Balancing communication and grammar in beginning-level foreign language classrooms: A study of guided planning and relativization. Language Teaching Research, 12, 11–37.
29.
MuranoiH. (2007). Output practice in the L2 classroom. In DeKeyserR. (Ed.), Practice in a second language. Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 51–84). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
O’BrienI.SegalowitzN.FreedB.CollentineJ. (2007). Phonological memory predicts second language oral fluency gains in adults. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29, 557–582.
31.
OrtegaL. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 109–148.
32.
OrtegaL. (2005). What do learners plan? Learner-driven attention to form during pre-task planning. In EllisR. (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 77–109). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.
33.
PayneJ.WhitneyP. (2002). Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: Output, working memory, and interlanguage development. CALICO Journal, 20, 7–32.
34.
RobinsonP. (1995). Attention, memory, and the ‘noticing’ hypothesis. Language Learning, 45, 281–331.
35.
RobinsonP. (2001). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for investigating task influences on SLA. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). New York: Cambridge University Press.
36.
RobinsonP. (2002). Effects of individual differences in intelligence, aptitude and working memory on adult incidental SLA. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 211–266). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
37.
RobinsonP. (2005a). Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 46–73.
38.
RobinsonP. (2005b). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 1–32.
39.
SangarunJ. (2005). The effects of focusing on meaning and form in strategic planning. In EllisR. (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 111–141). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
40.
SawyerM.RantaL. (2001). Aptitude, individual differences, and instructional design. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 319–353). New York: Cambridge University Press.
41.
SchmidtR. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 206–226.
42.
SegalowitzN. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. New York: Routledge.
43.
SkehanP. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44.
SkehanP. (2002). Theorising and updating aptitude. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed second language learning (pp. 69–93). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
45.
SkehanP.FosterP. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49, 93–120.
46.
SkehanP.FosterP. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183–205). New York: Cambridge University Press.
47.
SundermanG.KrollJ. (2009). When study-abroad experience fails to deliver: The internal resources threshold effect. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 70–99.
48.
SwainM. (1995) Three functions of output in second language learning. In CookG.SiedlhoferB (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 125–144). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
49.
UnsworthN.EngleR. (2007). The nature of individual differences in working memory capacity: Active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search from secondary memory. Psychological Review, 114, 104–132.
50.
YuanF.EllisR. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24, 1–27.
