This study investigated the extent to which second language (L2) learners benefited from proactive form-focused instruction (FFI) targeting French grammatical gender attribution and the degree to which L2 learners’ attention control and working memory predicted their learning gains. A total of 102 L2 learners received either proactive FFI targeting French grammatical gender attribution or their regular instruction (i.e. control condition) for six 80-minute instructional sessions. A pretest, an immediate posttest, and a delayed posttest were administered, each entailing binary-choice, text-completion, picture-description, and listening tasks. The L2 learners also completed the Simon Test and the Corsi Block-Tapping Test, which measured their attention control and working memory. Results showed that L2 learners receiving the proactive FFI condition significantly outperformed those receiving the control condition in all tasks after the instructional sessions. More importantly, L2 learners’ attention control and working memory were significant predictors of their learning gains in the binary-choice and listening tasks, but not in the text-completion and picture-description tasks. The current study highlighted the roles of L2 learners’ attention control and working memory in proactive FFI.
AtkinsP.W.BaddeleyA. (1998). Working memory and distributed vocabulary learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 537–552.
2.
AwhE.VogelE.K.OhS.-H. (2006). Interactions between attention and working memory. Neuroscience, 139, 201–208.
3.
BaarsB.J. (1988). A cognitive theory of consciousness. Cambridge University Press.
4.
BaarsB.J. (1997). In the theatre of consciousness. Global workspace theory, a rigorous scientific theory of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 4, 292–309.
5.
BaddeleyA. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory?Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 417–423.
6.
BaddeleyA. (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 829–839.
7.
BaddeleyA.D.HitchG. (1974). Working memory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 8, 47–89.
8.
BauerD.J.CurranP.J. (2005). Probing interactions in fixed and multilevel regression: Inferential and graphical techniques. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 373–400.
9.
BellP. (2009). ‘Le cadeau’ or ‘la cadeau’? The role of aptitude in learner awareness of gender distinctions in French. Canadian Modern Language Review, 65, 615–643.
10.
BialystokE.CraikF.LukG. (2008). Cognitive control and lexical access in younger and older bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 859–873.
11.
BlairC.RazzaR.P. (2007). Relating effortful control, executive function, and false belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in kindergarten. Child Development, 78, 647–663.
12.
ChenY. (1999). Les lettres chinoises. Leméac.
13.
ChunD.M.PayneJ.S. (2004). What makes students click: Working memory and look-up behavior. System, 32, 481–503.
14.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd edition.Lawrence Erlbaum.
15.
CowanN. (2005). Working memory capacity. Psychology Press.
16.
CraikF.I.M. (2002). Levels of processing: Past, present … and future?Memory, 10, 305–318.
17.
DarcyI.MoraJ.C.DaidoneD. (2014). Attention control and inhibition influence phonological development in a second language. Concordia Working Papers in Applied Linguistics, 5, 115–129.
18.
DeKeyserR.M. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In DoughtyC.J.WilliamsJ. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 42–63). Cambridge University Press.
19.
DeKeyserR.M. (2001). Automaticity and automatization. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 125–151). Cambridge University Press.
20.
DiamondA.LeeK. (2011). Interventions shown to aid executive function development in children 4 to 12 years old. Science, 333, 959–964.
21.
DiamondA.BarnettW.S.ThomasJ.MunroS. (2007). Preschool program improves cognitive control. Science, 318, 1387–1388.
22.
DracosM. (2013). The effects of form-focused training and working memory on the L2 processing and learning of morphological cues. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, USA.
23.
EllisR.LoewenS.ErlamR. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339–368.
24.
EviatarZ. (1998). Attention as a psychological entity and its effects on language and communication. In StemmerB.WhitakerH.A. (Eds.), Handbook of neurolinguistics (pp. 275–287). Academic Press.
25.
EysenckM.KeaneM. (2010). Cognitive psychology: A student’s handbook. 6th edition.Psychology Press.
26.
FougnieD. (2008). The relationship between attention and working memory. In JohansenN.B. (Ed.), New research on short-term memory (pp. 1–45). Nova Science Publishers.
27.
FrenchL.M.O’BrienI. (2008). Phonological memory and children’s second language grammar learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29, 463–487.
28.
FuM.LiS. (2019). The associations between individual differences in working memory and the effectiveness of immediate and delayed corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Studies, 2, 233–257.
29.
GhasemiB.Vaez-DaliliM. (2019). Effect of three methods of morphological awareness on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ reading comprehension. International Journal of Instruction, 12, 623–638.
30.
GodfroidA.UggenM.S. (2013). Attention to irregular verbs by beginning learners of German: An eye-movement study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 291–322.
31.
GoochR.SaitoK.LysterR. (2016). Effects of recasts and prompts on L2 pronunciation development: Teaching English /ɹ/ to Korean adult EFL learners. System, 60, 117–127.
32.
HarleyB. (1998). The role of form-focused tasks in promoting child L2 acquisition. In DoughtyC.J.WilliamsJ. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 156–174). Cambridge University Press.
JohnsonP.O.NeymanJ. (1936). Tests of certain linear hypotheses and their application to some educational problems. Statistical Research Memoirs, 1, 57–93.
35.
JuffsA. (2004). Representation, processing and working memory in a second language. Transactions of the Philological Society, 102, 199–225.
36.
KangE.Y.SokS.HanZ. (2019). Thirty-five years of ISLA on form-focused instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 23, 428–453.
37.
KapaL.L.ColomboJ. (2014). Executive function predicts artificial language learning. Journal of Memory and Language, 76, 237–252.
38.
KeatingG.D. (2010). The effects of linear distance and working memory on the processing of gender agreement in Spanish. In VanPattenB.JegerskiJ. (Eds.), Research in second language processing and parsing (pp. 113–134). John Benjamins.
39.
KelloggR.T. (2007). Are written and spoken recall of text equivalent?The American Journal of Psychology, 120, 415–428.
40.
Larson-HallJ. (2010). A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS. Routledge.
41.
LaurinJ.JacobR. (2006). Ma grammaire. Les Éditions de l’Homme.
42.
LeeA.H.LysterR. (2016). The effects of corrective feedback on instructed L2 speech perception. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 35–64.
43.
LiM.DeKeyserR. (2017). Perception practice, production practice, and musical ability in L2 Mandarin tone-word learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39, 593–620.
44.
LinckJ.A.OsthusP.KoethJ.T.BuntingM.F. (2014). Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 21, 861–883.
45.
LissoubaB.D. (1994). Les libres propos de Binéka. Saint-Maur-des-Fossés: Sépia.
46.
LysterR. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399–432.
47.
LysterR. (2006). Predictability in French gender attribution: A corpus analysis. Journal of French Language Studies, 16, 69–92.
48.
LysterR.IzquierdoJ. (2009). Prompts versus recasts in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 59, 453–498.
49.
LysterR.SatoM. (2013). Skill acquisition theory and the role of practice in L2 development. In García MayoP.Gutierrez-MangadoM.Martínez AdriánM. (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 71–92). John Benjamins.
50.
McDonoughK.KimY. (2016). Working memory and L2 English speakers’ primed and subsequent production of passives. In GranenaG.JacksonD.O.YilmazY. (Eds.), Cognitive individual differences in second language processing and acquisition (pp. 205–222). John Benjamins.
51.
McDonoughK.TrofimovichP. (2016). The role of statistical learning and working memory in L2 speakers’ pattern learning. Modern Language Journal, 100, 428–445.
52.
MiyakeA.ShahP. (1999). Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control. Cambridge University Press.
53.
MoralesJ.CalvoA.BialystokE. (2013). Working memory development in monolingual and bilingual children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 114, 187–202.
54.
NguyenM.PhamH.PhamT. (2017). The effects of input enhancement and recasts on the development of second language pragmatic competence. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 11, 45–67.
55.
PhamA.V.HassonR.M. (2014). Verbal and visuospatial working memory as predictors of children’s reading ability. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 29, 467–477.
56.
QuenéH.van den BerghH. (2008). Examples of mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects and with binomial data. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 413–425.
57.
R Core Team (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: http://www.R-project.org (accessed September 2021).
58.
RantaL.LysterR. (2018). Form-focused instruction. In GarrettP.CotsJ. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language awareness (pp. 40–56). Routledge.
59.
RévészA. (2012). Working memory and the observed effectiveness of recasts on different L2 outcome measures. Language Learning, 62, 93–132.
60.
RobinsonP. (2003). Attention and memory during SLA. In DoughtyC.J.LongM.H. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 631–678). Wiley-Blackwell.
61.
RobinsonP.MackeyA.GassS.M.SchmidtR. (2012). Attention and awareness in second language acquisition. In GassS.MackeyA. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 247–267). Routledge.
62.
Sá-LeiteA.R.FragaI.ComesañaM. (2019). Grammatical gender processing in bilinguals: An analytic review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 26, 1148–1173.
63.
SachsR. (2010). Individual differences and the effectiveness of visual feedback on reflexive binding in L2 Japanese. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
64.
SagarraN.HerschensohnJ. (2010). The role of proficiency and working memory in gender and number agreement processing in L1 and L2 Spanish. Lingua, 120, 2022–2039.
65.
SaitoK.LysterR. (2012). Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /ɹ/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning, 62, 595–633.
66.
SchmidtR. (2001). Attention. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge University Press.
67.
SegalowitzN.Frenkiel-FishmanS. (2005). Attention control and ability level in a complex cognitive skill: Attention shifting and second-language proficiency. Memory and Cognition, 33, 644–653.
68.
Sharwood SmithM. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165–179.
69.
ShintaniN. (2019). The roles of explicit instruction and guided practice in the proceduralization of a complex grammatical structure. In DeKeyserR.M.BotanaG.P. (Eds.), Doing SLA research with implications for the classroom: Reconciling methodological demands and pedagogical applicability (pp. 83–106). John Benjamins.
70.
SpadaN. (1997). Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 30, 73–87.
71.
SwainM. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In GassS.M.MaddenC. (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Newbury House.
72.
SwainM. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In CookG.SeidlhoferB. (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125–144). Oxford University Press.
73.
TalmyL. (1996). The windowing of attention. In ShibataniM.ThompsonS.A. (Eds.), Grammatical constructions (pp. 235–288). Oxford University Press.
74.
ThorellL.B.LindqvistS.Bergman NutleyS.BohlinG.KlingbergT. (2009). Training and transfer effects of executive functions in preschool children. Developmental Science, 12, 106–113.
75.
TrofimovichP.AmmarA.GatbontonE. (2007). How effective are recasts? The role of attention, memory, and analytical ability. In MackeyA. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 171–195). Oxford University Press.
76.
TseC.-S.AltarribaJ. (2014). The relationship between language proficiency and attentional control in Cantonese–English bilingual children: Evidence from Simon, Simon switching, and working memory tasks. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 00954.
77.
TuckerG.R.LambertW.E.RigaultA. (1977). The French speaker’s skill with grammatical gender: An example of rule-governed behavior. Mouton De Gruyter.
78.
TuckerG.R.LambertW.E.RigaultA.SegalowitzN. (1968). A psychological investigation of French speakers’ skill with grammatical gender. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 7, 312–316.
79.
VandierendonckA.LiefoogheB.VerbruggenF. (2010). Task switching: Interplay of reconfiguration and interference control. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 601–626.
80.
VanPattenB. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Ablex.
81.
WardenM. (1997). The effect of form-focused instruction on control over grammatical gender by French immersion students in grade 11. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, ON, Canada.
82.
ZalbideaJ.SanzC. (2020). Does learner cognition count on modality? Working memory and L2 morphosyntactic achievement across oral and written tasks. Applied Psycholinguistics, 41, 1171–1196.
