This study systematically reviewed previous research on the effects of task repetition (TR) on second language (L2) learners’ writing performance (WP) and conducted a meta-analysis to analyse the moderating variables. A total of 17 independent studies involving 442 participants were included. The results showed that TR could significantly enhance L2 learners’ WP (g = 0.25, p < .01), though the effect size varied across different dimensions. Specifically, a significant positive medium effect size was found for fluency in L2 learners’ WP (g = 0.51, p < .01), while accuracy and lexical complexity showed significant positive small effect sizes (g = 0.24 for both, p < .01 for both). In contrast, the positive effect on syntactic complexity was minimal and not statistically significant (g = 0.06, p = .57). Three variables including repetition interval, writing genre, and writing medium, exhibited distinct moderating effects. TR was found to be more effective with a one-week interval, in argumentative writing tasks, and when conducted in a computer-mediated environment. Although other factors, such as the repetition number, repetition type, language proficiency and age of the learners, and interaction style did not moderate the effect, they indicated general trends that offer valuable guidance for implementing TR. For instance, it can be argued that one repetition is sufficient to improve learners’ WP and that TR may serve as a more efficient tool for adult learners. Overall, TR is an effective strategy for improving L2 learners’ WP, regardless of their language proficiency, repetition type, or interaction style. The results of this study can serve as valuable guidance for L2 instructors in implementing TR effectively in their teaching practices. Given the current scarcity of research on TR’s impact on L2 learners’ WP, further studies are recommended to explore how TR can be optimized to enhance L2 learners’ WP.
*Abdi TabariM.GolparvarS.E. (2024). The interplay of task repetition and task rehearsal in L2 written production across varied proficiency levels. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688241266940
2.
Abdi TabariM.JohnsonM.D.FarahanyniaM. (2023). Automated analysis of cohesive features in L2 writing: Examining effects of task complexity and task repetition. Assessing Writing, 58, Article 100783.
3.
*Abdi TabariM.KhezrlouS.GhanbarH. (2024). Task repetition versus task rehearsal: Understanding effects of task-readiness factors and elemental genres on L2 writing task performance. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688241249689
4.
Abdi TabariM.KhezrlouS.TianY. (2024). Verb argument construction complexity indices and L2 written production: Effects of task complexity and task repetition. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 18, 1–16.
5.
AhmadianM.J. (2013). Working memory and task repetition in second language oral production. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 23, 37–55.
6.
*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, 1052–1068.
7.
BorensteinM. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley.
8.
BuiG.YuR. (2021). Differentiating task repetition from task rehearsal. In SudharshanaN.P.MukhopadhyayL. (Eds.), Task-based language teaching and assessment (pp. 119–137). Springer Nature Singapore.
9.
BygateM. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In BygateM.SkehanP.SwainM. (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks (pp. 23–48). Longman.
10.
BygateM. (Ed.). (2018). Learning language through task repetition. John Benjamins.
11.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Psychology Press.
12.
DeKeyserR. (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.
13.
DurlakJ.A. (2009). How to select, calculate, and interpret effect sizes. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34, 917–928.
14.
EllisR. (2005). Planning and task-based performance: Theory and research. In EllisR. (Ed.), Language learning and language teaching: Volume 11 (pp. 3–34). John Benjamins.
15.
EllisR.SkehanP.LiS.ShintaniN.LambertC. (2020). Task-based language teaching: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.
16.
FukunagaT. (2023). L2 writing development through two types of writing task repetition. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 61, 1109–1138.
17.
GassS.MackeyA.Alvarez-TorresM.J.Fernández-GarcíaM. (1999). The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, 49, 549–581.
18.
HanzawaK.SuzukiY. (2023). How do learners perceive task repetition? Distributed practice effects on engagement and metacognitive judgment. Modern Language Journal, 107, 451–478.
19.
HidalgoM.Á.García MayoM.D.P. (2021). The influence of task repetition type on young EFL learners’ attention to form. Language Teaching Research, 25, 565–586.
20.
*HidalgoM.Á.Lázaro-IbarrolaA. (2020). Task repetition and collaborative writing by EFL children: Beyond CAF measures. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 10, 501–522.
21.
HiverP.Al-HoorieA.H.MurakamiA. (2024). Modeling the effects of task repetition in second language writing: Examining interindividual and intraindividual variability. Language Learning, 75, 493–532.
22.
HousenA.KuikenF.VedderI. (Eds.). (2012). Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA: Volume 32. John Benjamins.
23.
HuhM.-H.LeeJ.HaH.S. (2018). EFL writing development through repetition of a literature-reading-writing task. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics, 34, 53–74.
24.
HunterA.M. (2017). Fluency development in the ESL classroom: The impact of immediate task repetition and procedural repetition on learners’ oral fluency. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, St Mary’s University, Twickenham, London, UK.
25.
Itze Arredondo-TapiaD.Emmanuell Garcia-PonceE. (2021). Role of task repetition and content familiarity in EFL students’ fluency and accuracy in narrative tasks: A case study. Journal of Language and Education, 7, 45–63.
26.
JungS. (2013). The effect of task repetition and corrective feedback in L2 writing. MSU Working Papers in Second Language Studies, 4, 24–38.
27.
KelloggR.T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In LevyM.RansdellS. (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 57–71). Erlbaum.
28.
KhezrlouS. (2021). Effects of timing and availability of isolated FFI on learners’ written accuracy and fluency through task repetition. Language Learning Journal, 49, 568–580.
29.
KimJ.C. (2024). The role of individual differences and effect of task repetition with written corrective feedback in L2 writing development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA.
30.
KimJ.K.LeeJ.H. (2019). Effects of the number of task repetitions on Korean middle school students’ English writing and perception. Secondary English Education, 12, 3–25.
31.
KimS.K.WebbS. (2022). The effects of spaced practice on second language learning: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 72, 269–319.
32.
*KimY.ChoiB.YunH.KimB.ChoiS. (2022). Task repetition, synchronous written corrective feedback and the learning of Korean grammar: A classroom-based study. Language Teaching Research, 26, 1106–1132.
33.
*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, 827–849.
34.
KimY.Tracy-VenturaN. (2013). The role of task repetition in L2 performance development: What needs to be repeated during task-based interaction?System, 41, 829–840.
35.
LambertC.KormosJ.MinnD. (2017). Task repetition and second language speech processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39, 167–196.
36.
LatimierA.PeyreH.RamusF. (2021). A meta-analytic review of the benefit of spacing out retrieval practice episodes on retention. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 959–987.
37.
LiS. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 309–365.
LiuJ. (2024). Meaning-oriented understanding of L2 academic writing development with task-type repetition. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, Article 1167.
40.
LópezA.J.S. (2018). External task-repetition: The role of modality, written corrective feedback and proficiency. A comparative study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
41.
LuoS.Q.XunH. (2023). Task-based language learning research at home and abroad (2001–2021): Current status, trends and new frontiers. Shandong Foreign Language Teaching, 44, 39–48.
42.
*MehrangF. (2016). The effect of task structure, task repetition, and reformulation on foreign language written performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland, Auckland, NSW, Australia.
43.
MitchellR.MylesF.MarsdenE. (2019). Second language learning theories (4th ed.). Routledge.
44.
NguyenH.NguyenH.VoN.HuynhN. (2023). The combined effects of task repetition and post-task teacher-corrected transcribing on complexity, accuracy and fluency of L2 oral performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 63, 1317–1345.
45.
NittaR.BabaK. (2014). Task repetition and L2 writing development: A longitudinal study from a dynamic systems perspective. In ByrnesH.ManchónR. (Eds.), Task-based language learning and teaching: Insights from writing (pp. 107–136). John Benjamins.
46.
PatanasornC. (2010). Effects of procedural content and task repetition on accuracy and fluency in an EFL context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, USA.
47.
QiuX.LoY.Y. (2017). Content familiarity, task repetition and Chinese EFL learners’ engagement in second language use. Language Teaching Research, 21, 681–698.
48.
RobinsonP. (2001). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). Cambridge University Press.
49.
RógT.KrawiecM. (2024). Task repetition and L2 grit: Exploring the interplay in language learners’ oral performance. TASK, 4, 241–266.
50.
RogersJ. (2023). Spacing effects in task repetition research. Language Learning, 73, 445–474.
51.
*RoothooftH.Lázaro-IbarrolaA.BultéB. (2022). Task repetition and corrective feedback via models and direct corrections among young EFL writers: Draft quality and task motivation. Language Teaching Research, 29, 1311–1344.
52.
*SánchezA.J.ManchónR.M.GilabertR. (2020). The effects of task repetition across modalities and proficiency levels. In ManchonR. (Ed.), Writing and language learning: Advancing research agendas (pp. 121–144). John Benjamins
53.
SkehanP. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30, 510–532.
54.
SkehanP. (2014). Introduction: Coordinated research into task-based performance. In SkehanP. (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 1–26). John Benjamins.
55.
SunY.LiuH. (2023). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of task repetition on l2 oral output. Foreign Languages Research, 40, 68–74.
56.
ThaiC.BoersF. (2016). Repeating a monologue under increasing time pressure: Effects on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. TESOL Quarterly, 50, 369–393.
57.
UllmanM. (2006). The declarative/procedural model and the shallow structure hypothesis. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 97–105.
