Research on task-based second-language (L2) writing has largely focused on investigating how task complexity (TC) affects various aspects of written production. However, this body of research has rarely examined the effect of task repetition, either on its own or in interaction with TC. Additionally, studies have predominantly used traditional frequency-based measures of lexical sophistication, without incorporating more nuanced, sense-aware indices that could offer a deeper understanding of linguistic complexity. This study aims to explore and compare the impact of TC, task repetition, and their interaction on lexical sophistication in L2 writing, using both traditional and sense-aware frequency-based indices. Ninety-six participants completed two argumentative essays on simple and complex tasks in counterbalanced order, twice over four weeks. These essays were analyzed using a set of lexical sophistication indices, both traditional and sense-aware. Repeated-measures MANOVA with TC and time as within-subject variables showed significant main effects of TC and time on overall lexical sophistication, with sense-aware indices being more sensitive and yielding larger effect sizes than traditional word-form-based measures. The theoretical, methodological, and practical implications of our findings are discussed.
Abdi TabariM. (2021). Task preparedness and L2 written production: Investigating effects of planning modes on L2 learners’ focus of attention and output. Journal of Second Language Writing, 52, Article 100814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100814
2.
Abdi TabariM.ChoM. (2022). Task sequencing and L2 writing development: Exploring the SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing. Language Teaching Research, Advanced Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221090922
3.
Abdi TabariM.KhezrlouS.TianY. (2022). Task complexity, task repetition, and L2 writing complexity: exploring interactions in the TBLT domain. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 62(2), 871–901. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0123
4.
Abdi TabariM.LuX.WangY. (2023). The effects of task complexity on lexical complexity in L2 writing: An exploratory study. System, 114, Article 103021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103021
5.
Abdi TabariM.GoetzeJ. (2024). Exploring the impacts of task complexity, anxiety, and self-efficacy on L2 written production: Unraveling individual differences in TBLT. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 34(4), 1533–1555. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12582
6.
Abdi TabariM.HiverP.NorouzianR. (2024). Interactions between task complexity, task repetition, and task motivation in L2 writing. Language Teaching Research, Advanced Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688241286661
7.
Abdi TabariM.LeeH.HanzawaK. (2025). Effects of massed and spaced task repetitions on L2 writing task performance and task emotions. Reading and Writing, Advanced Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10628-2
8.
AbramsZ. I. (2019). The effects of integrated writing on linguistic complexity in L2 writing and task-complexity. System, 81, 110–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.01.009
9.
AhmadianM. J.TavakoliM. (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. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810383329
10.
AmiryousefiM. (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), 1052–1068. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2016.1170040
11.
BabaK.NittaR. (2011). Dynamic effects of task type practice on the Japanese EFL university student’s writing: Text analysis with Coh-Metrix. In McCarthyP. M.Boonthum-DeneckeC. (Eds.), Applied natural language processing: Identification, investigation, and resolution (pp. 398–413). Information Science Reference.
BultéB.HousenA. (2012). Defining and operationalising L2 complexity. In HousenA.VedderI.KuikenF. (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity; accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 21–46). John Benjamins.
14.
BygateM. (2018). Learning language through task repetition. John Benjamins.
15.
BygateM.NorrisJ.BrandenK. (2015). Task-based language teaching. In ChapelleC. A. (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1–8). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
16.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.
17.
CuiY.LuoS. (2024). “Writing-to-learn”: The influence of task repetition on CSL writers’ attention to form. Applied Linguistics Review, 15(3), 793–820. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2022-0001
18.
DallerH.Van HoutR.Treffers-DallerJ. (2003). Lexical richness in the spontaneous speech of bilinguals. Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 197–222. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.2.197
19.
DaviesM. (2012). Expanding horizons in historical linguistics with the 400-million word Corpus of Historical American English. Corpora, 7(2), 121–157. https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2012.0024
20.
DeKeyserR. M. (2018). Task repetition for language learning: A perspective from skill acquisition theory. In BygateM. (Ed.), Learning language through task repetition (pp. 27–41). John Benjamins.
21.
De WildeV. (2023). Lexical characteristics of young L2 English learners’ narrative writing at the start of formal instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 59, Article 100960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2022.100960
22.
EguchiM.KyleK. (2020). Continuing to explore the multidimensional nature of lexical sophistication: The case of oral proficiency interviews. Modern Language Journal, 104(2), 381–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12637
23.
FrearM. W.BitchenerJ. (2015). The effects of cognitive task complexity on writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.009
24.
FukutaJ. (2016). Effects of task repetition on learners’ attention orientation in L2 oral production. Language Teaching Research, 20(3), 321–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815570142
25.
GolparvarS. E.AzizsahraM. (2023). The effect of graph complexity and planning on graph writing performance and descriptive strategies. Foreign Language Annals, 56(1), 117–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12676
26.
HoeyM. (2012). Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. Routledge.
27.
HuR.LiS.LiangS. (2019). Diachronic sense modeling with deep contextualized word embeddings: An ecological view. In Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 3899–3908). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/p19-1379
28.
JohnsonM. 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 Writing, 37, 13–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.06.001
29.
JungJ. (2017). Effects of task complexity on L2 writing processes and linguistic complexity: A keystroke logging study. English Teaching, 72(4), 179–200. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.72.4.201712.179
30.
KelloggR. T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In LevyC. M.RansdellS. (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, Individual Differences, and Applications (pp. 57–71). Lawrence Erlbaum.
31.
KimM.CrossleyS. A.KyleK. (2018). Lexical sophistication as a multidimensional phenomenon: Relations to second language lexical proficiency, development, and writing quality. The Modern Language Journal, 102(1), 120–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12447
32.
KimY.KangS.YunH.KimB.ChoiB. (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. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12501
33.
KormosJ. (2011). Task complexity and linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 148–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.02.001
KuikenF.VedderI. (2007). Task complexity and measures of linguistic performance in L2 writing. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 261–284. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2007.012
36.
KuikenF.VedderI. (2008). Cognitive task complexity and written output in Italian and French as a foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(1), 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.08.003
37.
KuikenF.VedderI. (2011). Task complexity and linguistic performance in L2 writing and speaking. Second language task complexity. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 91–104). John Benjamins.
38.
KuikenF.VedderI. (2012). Syntactic complexity, lexical variation, and accuracy as a function of task complexity and proficiency level in L2 writing and speaking. In HousenA.KuikenF.VedderI. (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in SLA (pp. 143–170). John Benjamins.
39.
KyleK.CrossleyS. A. (2015). Automatically assessing lexical sophistication: indices, tools, findings, and application. TESOL Quarterly, 49(4), 757–786. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.194
40.
KyleK.CrossleyS. A.BergerC. M. (2018). The tool for the automatic analysis of lexical sophistication (TAALES): Version 2.0. Behavior Research Methods, 50(3), 1030–1046. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0924-4
41.
LauferB.NationP. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 307–322. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/16.3.307
LiC.WeiL.LuX. (2024). Task complexity and L2 writing performance of young learners: Contributions of cognitive and affective factors. The Modern Language Journal, 108(3), 741–770. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12954
44.
LongM. (2014). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. John Wiley & Sons.
LuX. (2025). Meaning and function dimensions of linguistic complexity in second language writing. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 4(1), Article 100191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2025.100191
47.
LuX.HuR. (2022). Sense-aware lexical sophistication indices and their relationship to second language writing quality. Behavior Research Methods, 54(3), 1444–1460. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01675-6
48.
LuX.GamsonD. A.EckertS. A. (2014). Lexical difficulty and diversity of American elementary school reading textbooks. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 19(1), 94–117. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.19.1.04lu
49.
ManchónR. M. (2014). The distinctive nature of task repetition in writing. implications for theory, research, and pedagogy. Elia, 14(13), 13–41. https://doi.org/10.12795/elia.2014.i14.02
50.
ManchónR. M.McBrideS.MartínezM. D. M.VasyletsO. (2023). Working memory, L2 proficiency, and task complexity: Independent and interactive effects on L2 written performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 45(3), 737–764. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263123000141
NationI. S. P. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
53.
NittaR.BabaK. (2014). Task repetition and L2 writing development. In ByrnesH.ManchónR. M. (Eds.), Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 107–136). John Benjamins.
54.
PlonskyL.OswaldF. L. (2014). How big is “Big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079
55.
RahimiM. (2019). Effects of increasing the degree of reasoning and the number of elements on L2 argumentative writing. Language Teaching Research, 23(5), 633–654. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818761465
56.
RahimiM.ZhangL. 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9887-9
57.
RandyA.AngelA. (2023). Automated measures of lexical sophistication: Predicting proficiency in an integrated academic writing task. Journal of Language and Education, 9(1), 12–25. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.11045
58.
ReadJ. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge University Press.
59.
RobinsonP. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 27–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.27
60.
RobinsonP. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 43(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1
61.
RobinsonP. (2022). The cognition hypothesis, the triadic componential framework, and the SSARC model: An instructional design theory of pedagogic task sequencing. In MohammadA.LongM. H. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of task-based language teaching (pp. 205–225). Cambridge University Press.
62.
RobinsonP.GilabertR. (2007). Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis, and second language learning and performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 161–176. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2007.007
63.
SánchezL.KalamakisS. Z. (2023). The interplay of task complexity (± Here-and-Now) and proficiency in shaping written narratives in Spanish as a foreign language. System, 112, Article 102949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102949
64.
SchmittN. (2014). Size and depth of vocabulary knowledge: What the research shows. Language Learning, 64(4), 913–951. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12077
65.
SkehanP. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press.
66.
SkehanP. (2009). Modeling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510–532. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp047
67.
SkehanP. (2014). Limited attentional capacity, second language performance, and task-based pedagogy. In SkehanP. (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 211–260). John Benjamins.
68.
SkehanP. (2016). Tasks versus conditions: Two perspectives on task research and their implications for pedagogy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190515000100
69.
SuzukiY.DeKeyserR. (2017). Effects of distributed practice on the proceduralization of morphology. Language Teaching Research, 21(2), 166–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815617334
70.
TsengM. F.GengZ. (2022). Task repetition with peer review as corrective feedback for L2 writing in Mandarin Chinese. Chinese Language Learning and Technology, 2(1), 67–106.
71.
VanPattenB. (2007). Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In VanpattenB.WilliamsJ. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 115–135). Lawrence Erlbaum.
72.
WickensC. D. (2007). Attention to the second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2007.008
73.
YannakoudakisH.BriscoeT.MedlockB. (2011). A new dataset and method for automatically grading ESOL texts. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 180–189). Association for Computational Linguistics.
74.
YooH.KimH. (2023). A cross-modal analysis of lexical sophistication: EFL and ESL learners in written and spoken production. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2023-0204
75.
YoonH. J. (2021). Challenging the connection between task perceptions and language use in L2 writing: Genre, cognitive task complexity, and linguistic complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 54, Article 100857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100857
