Lag effects in grammar learning: A desirable difficulties perspective
This paper examined lag effects in the learning of second language (L2) grammar. Moreover, following the Desirable Difficulty Framework for L2 practice, the present study investigated whether lag effects could be explained by other sources of difficulty. Using digital flashcards, 117 English languag...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Applied psycholinguistics 2022-05, Vol.43 (3), p.513-550 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 550 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 513 |
| container_title | Applied psycholinguistics |
| container_volume | 43 |
| creator | Serfaty, Jonathan Serrano, Raquel |
| description | This paper examined lag effects in the learning of second language (L2) grammar. Moreover, following the Desirable Difficulty Framework for L2 practice, the present study investigated whether lag effects could be explained by other sources of difficulty. Using digital flashcards, 117 English language learners (aged 10–18) learned two grammatical structures over two different sessions at a 1-day or 7-day intersession interval (ISI). Learners’ performance was analyzed at two retention intervals (RIs) of 7 and 28 days, respectively. Linguistic difficulty was compared by examining two different structures, while learner-related difficulty was analyzed by comparing learners who differed in terms of age, proficiency, and time required to complete the training. Results showed no main effect of ISI, a main effect of RI, and a small but significant ISI × RI interaction. Linguistic difficulty and age did not interact with ISI or RI. However, longer lags led to significantly higher scores for faster learners and learners of higher proficiency, while shorter lags promoted significantly higher scores for slower learners and learners of lower proficiency. The findings provide some support for the Desirable Difficulty Framework in its potential to explain L2 lag effects. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S0142716421000631 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2671503092</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0142716421000631</cupid><sourcerecordid>2671503092</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5e130771914eec6d3ac442eca140d40d3f177cff9fb29c4243e64f351de3cad23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsfwFvA82omSZOut1JqFRY8qOclTSZLyv4z2Qp-e3dpwYMIA3N47_eGeYTcArsHBvrhjYHkGpTkwBhTAs7IDKTKM1iCPiezSc4m_ZJcpbQfPUvO-YxsClNR9B7tkGhoaRVN05hIazSxDW31SFfUYQrR7GqkLngf7KEeAibaY0z9yIUvvCYX3tQJb057Tj6eNu_r56x43b6sV0VmhWJDtkAQTGvIQSJa5YSxUnK0BiRz4wgPWlvvc7_juZVcClTSiwU4FNY4Lubk7pjbx-7zgGko990htuPJkisNCyZYPrng6LKxSymiL_sYxqe-S2Dl1Fb5p62RESfGNLsYXIW_0f9TPyJ-aw4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2671503092</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Lag effects in grammar learning: A desirable difficulties perspective</title><source>Cambridge Journals - CAUL Collection</source><creator>Serfaty, Jonathan ; Serrano, Raquel</creator><creatorcontrib>Serfaty, Jonathan ; Serrano, Raquel</creatorcontrib><description>This paper examined lag effects in the learning of second language (L2) grammar. Moreover, following the Desirable Difficulty Framework for L2 practice, the present study investigated whether lag effects could be explained by other sources of difficulty. Using digital flashcards, 117 English language learners (aged 10–18) learned two grammatical structures over two different sessions at a 1-day or 7-day intersession interval (ISI). Learners’ performance was analyzed at two retention intervals (RIs) of 7 and 28 days, respectively. Linguistic difficulty was compared by examining two different structures, while learner-related difficulty was analyzed by comparing learners who differed in terms of age, proficiency, and time required to complete the training. Results showed no main effect of ISI, a main effect of RI, and a small but significant ISI × RI interaction. Linguistic difficulty and age did not interact with ISI or RI. However, longer lags led to significantly higher scores for faster learners and learners of higher proficiency, while shorter lags promoted significantly higher scores for slower learners and learners of lower proficiency. The findings provide some support for the Desirable Difficulty Framework in its potential to explain L2 lag effects.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0142-7164</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-1817</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0142716421000631</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, USA: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Cognitive psychology ; Comprehension ; Difficulty Level ; English as a second language ; English as a second language learning ; English language learners ; Grammar ; Knowledge ; Language ; Language Acquisition ; Learning processes ; Linguistics ; Literature Reviews ; Meta Analysis ; Original Article ; Resistance (Psychology) ; Retention ; Second Language Learning ; Statistical Significance ; Vocabulary Development</subject><ispartof>Applied psycholinguistics, 2022-05, Vol.43 (3), p.513-550</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press</rights><rights>The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the associated terms available at: https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/reusing-open-access-and-sage-choice-content</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5e130771914eec6d3ac442eca140d40d3f177cff9fb29c4243e64f351de3cad23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5e130771914eec6d3ac442eca140d40d3f177cff9fb29c4243e64f351de3cad23</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9335-4702 ; 0000-0003-2861-6790</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0142716421000631/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,27915,27916,55619</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Serfaty, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Serrano, Raquel</creatorcontrib><title>Lag effects in grammar learning: A desirable difficulties perspective</title><title>Applied psycholinguistics</title><addtitle>Applied Psycholinguistics</addtitle><description>This paper examined lag effects in the learning of second language (L2) grammar. Moreover, following the Desirable Difficulty Framework for L2 practice, the present study investigated whether lag effects could be explained by other sources of difficulty. Using digital flashcards, 117 English language learners (aged 10–18) learned two grammatical structures over two different sessions at a 1-day or 7-day intersession interval (ISI). Learners’ performance was analyzed at two retention intervals (RIs) of 7 and 28 days, respectively. Linguistic difficulty was compared by examining two different structures, while learner-related difficulty was analyzed by comparing learners who differed in terms of age, proficiency, and time required to complete the training. Results showed no main effect of ISI, a main effect of RI, and a small but significant ISI × RI interaction. Linguistic difficulty and age did not interact with ISI or RI. However, longer lags led to significantly higher scores for faster learners and learners of higher proficiency, while shorter lags promoted significantly higher scores for slower learners and learners of lower proficiency. The findings provide some support for the Desirable Difficulty Framework in its potential to explain L2 lag effects.</description><subject>Cognitive psychology</subject><subject>Comprehension</subject><subject>Difficulty Level</subject><subject>English as a second language</subject><subject>English as a second language learning</subject><subject>English language learners</subject><subject>Grammar</subject><subject>Knowledge</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Language Acquisition</subject><subject>Learning processes</subject><subject>Linguistics</subject><subject>Literature Reviews</subject><subject>Meta Analysis</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Resistance (Psychology)</subject><subject>Retention</subject><subject>Second Language Learning</subject><subject>Statistical Significance</subject><subject>Vocabulary Development</subject><issn>0142-7164</issn><issn>1469-1817</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>IKXGN</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsfwFvA82omSZOut1JqFRY8qOclTSZLyv4z2Qp-e3dpwYMIA3N47_eGeYTcArsHBvrhjYHkGpTkwBhTAs7IDKTKM1iCPiezSc4m_ZJcpbQfPUvO-YxsClNR9B7tkGhoaRVN05hIazSxDW31SFfUYQrR7GqkLngf7KEeAibaY0z9yIUvvCYX3tQJb057Tj6eNu_r56x43b6sV0VmhWJDtkAQTGvIQSJa5YSxUnK0BiRz4wgPWlvvc7_juZVcClTSiwU4FNY4Lubk7pjbx-7zgGko990htuPJkisNCyZYPrng6LKxSymiL_sYxqe-S2Dl1Fb5p62RESfGNLsYXIW_0f9TPyJ-aw4</recordid><startdate>20220501</startdate><enddate>20220501</enddate><creator>Serfaty, Jonathan</creator><creator>Serrano, Raquel</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>IKXGN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BM</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>CPGLG</scope><scope>CRLPW</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9335-4702</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2861-6790</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220501</creationdate><title>Lag effects in grammar learning: A desirable difficulties perspective</title><author>Serfaty, Jonathan ; Serrano, Raquel</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5e130771914eec6d3ac442eca140d40d3f177cff9fb29c4243e64f351de3cad23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Cognitive psychology</topic><topic>Comprehension</topic><topic>Difficulty Level</topic><topic>English as a second language</topic><topic>English as a second language learning</topic><topic>English language learners</topic><topic>Grammar</topic><topic>Knowledge</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Language Acquisition</topic><topic>Learning processes</topic><topic>Linguistics</topic><topic>Literature Reviews</topic><topic>Meta Analysis</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Resistance (Psychology)</topic><topic>Retention</topic><topic>Second Language Learning</topic><topic>Statistical Significance</topic><topic>Vocabulary Development</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Serfaty, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Serrano, Raquel</creatorcontrib><collection>Cambridge Journals Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Art, Design & Architecture Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature - U.S. Customers Only</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Applied psycholinguistics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Serfaty, Jonathan</au><au>Serrano, Raquel</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Lag effects in grammar learning: A desirable difficulties perspective</atitle><jtitle>Applied psycholinguistics</jtitle><addtitle>Applied Psycholinguistics</addtitle><date>2022-05-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>43</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>513</spage><epage>550</epage><pages>513-550</pages><issn>0142-7164</issn><eissn>1469-1817</eissn><abstract>This paper examined lag effects in the learning of second language (L2) grammar. Moreover, following the Desirable Difficulty Framework for L2 practice, the present study investigated whether lag effects could be explained by other sources of difficulty. Using digital flashcards, 117 English language learners (aged 10–18) learned two grammatical structures over two different sessions at a 1-day or 7-day intersession interval (ISI). Learners’ performance was analyzed at two retention intervals (RIs) of 7 and 28 days, respectively. Linguistic difficulty was compared by examining two different structures, while learner-related difficulty was analyzed by comparing learners who differed in terms of age, proficiency, and time required to complete the training. Results showed no main effect of ISI, a main effect of RI, and a small but significant ISI × RI interaction. Linguistic difficulty and age did not interact with ISI or RI. However, longer lags led to significantly higher scores for faster learners and learners of higher proficiency, while shorter lags promoted significantly higher scores for slower learners and learners of lower proficiency. The findings provide some support for the Desirable Difficulty Framework in its potential to explain L2 lag effects.</abstract><cop>New York, USA</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0142716421000631</doi><tpages>38</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9335-4702</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2861-6790</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0142-7164 |
| ispartof | Applied psycholinguistics, 2022-05, Vol.43 (3), p.513-550 |
| issn | 0142-7164 1469-1817 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2671503092 |
| source | Cambridge Journals - CAUL Collection |
| subjects | Cognitive psychology Comprehension Difficulty Level English as a second language English as a second language learning English language learners Grammar Knowledge Language Language Acquisition Learning processes Linguistics Literature Reviews Meta Analysis Original Article Resistance (Psychology) Retention Second Language Learning Statistical Significance Vocabulary Development |
| title | Lag effects in grammar learning: A desirable difficulties perspective |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T06%3A09%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Lag%20effects%20in%20grammar%20learning:%20A%20desirable%20difficulties%20perspective&rft.jtitle=Applied%20psycholinguistics&rft.au=Serfaty,%20Jonathan&rft.date=2022-05-01&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=513&rft.epage=550&rft.pages=513-550&rft.issn=0142-7164&rft.eissn=1469-1817&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0142716421000631&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2671503092%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2671503092&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0142716421000631&rfr_iscdi=true |