Fluency in Writing: A Multidimensional Perspective on Writing Fluency Applied to L1 and L2

Waes, Luuk Van; Leijten, Mariëlle

doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2015.09.012

Cited by 82 publications

(94 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although investigation of L2 writers' cognition while composing is not an easy feat, scholars have come a long way in the development of taxonomies that support the conceptualization and modelling of the writing process; some of those taxonomies reflect its multidimensional nature involving cognitive, metacognitive, and affective strategies. More recently, work has begun on the study of the temporal aspects of L2 composing (e.g., Van Waes & Leijten, 2015), but research in this area is still scarce. The challenges that researchers face and that become apparent when one examines the previous literature in this field of study often relate to methodological issues.…”

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Tracking the Real‐Time Evolution of a Writing Event: Second Language Writers at Different Proficiency Levels

Gánem-Gutiérrez

Gilmore

2018

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study focused on emergent processes during real‐time second language (L2) writing activity in an English as a foreign language university context, examining differences in these processes across individual capacities. Participants included 22 adult Japanese learners of L2 English and their tutor. The data were collected using digital screen capture and eye‐tracking technologies while the learners wrote a 35‐minute argumentative essay. Supplementary stimulated retrospective recalls were also conducted to document the learners’ and the tutor's reflections on the writing event. Results revealed clear differences in L2 writing activity at different periods in time as well as differences in cognitive activity that appear to be mediated by L2 proficiency. Importantly, the obtained patterns differed depending on whether duration or frequency data were considered. These findings thus demonstrate the need to broaden the study of the temporal dimension of L2 writing and to consider more nuanced mixed‐methods approaches in future work.

show abstract

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Tracking the Real‐Time Evolution of a Writing Event: Second Language Writers at Different Proficiency Levels

Gánem-Gutiérrez

Gilmore

2018

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is important to note that this measure is 288 only one of the potential indicators of fluency in composition. Other fluency 289 indicators include measures such as the mean number of strokes per minute, and the 290 total number of strokes (e.g., Van Waes & Leijten, 2015). Note that our 291 transcription fluency measure correlated strongly with the average strokes per 292 minute such that increased fluency was related to more strokes per minute, 293 r(99) =-.62, p \ .001, while there was only a weak correlation (in the same 294 direction) with the total number of strokes, r(99) =-.32, p = .001.…”

Section: U N C O R R E C T E D P R O O F 118mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pauses in written composition: on the importance of where writers pause

Medimorec

Risko

2017

Read Writ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

6 7 Ó Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 20178 Abstract Much previous research has conceptualized pauses during writing as 9 indicators of the engagement of higher-level cognitive processes. In the present 10 study 101 university students composed narrative or argumentative essays, while 11 their key logging was recorded. We investigated the relation between pauses within 12 three time intervals (300-999, 1000-1999, and [2000 ms), at different text 13 boundaries (i.e., between words, sentences, and paragraphs), genre (i.e., narrative 14 vs. argumentative), and transcription fluency (i.e., typing speed). Moreover, we 15 investigated the relation between pauses and various lexical characteristics of essays 16 (e.g., word frequency, sentence length) controlling for transcription fluency and 17 genre. In addition to replicating a number of previously reported pause effects in 18 composition, we also show that pauses are related to various aspects of writing, 19 regardless of transcription fluency and genre. Critically our results show that the 20 majority of pause effects in written composition are modulated by pause location. 21 For example, increased pause rates at word boundaries predicted word frequency, 22 while pause rates at sentence boundaries predicted sentence length, suggesting 23 different levels of processing at these text boundaries. Lastly, we report some 24 inconsistencies when using various definitions of pauses. We discuss potential 25 mechanisms underlying effects of pauses at different text boundaries on writing. 26 27 Keywords Writing Á Pauses Á Computational linguistics 28 29 30 A1Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (

show abstract

“…We operationalized speed fluency narrowly, adopting a process-oriented perspective (Abdel Latif, 2013;Van Waes & Leijten, 2015). According to Abdel-Latif, valid measurement of speed fluency involves calculating indices of the length of the writer's production units, that is, bursts occurring between pauses (P-burst).…”

Section: Data Analysis Online Writing Behaviorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Task Complexity on L2 Writing Behaviors and Linguistic Complexity

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated whether task complexity influences second language (L2) writers’ fluency, pausing, and revision behaviors and the cognitive processes underlying these behaviors; whether task complexity affects linguistic complexity of written output; and whether relationships between writing behaviors and linguistic complexity are moderated by task complexity. Participants were 73 advanced L2 writers, who completed simple or complex essay tasks. Task complexity was operationalized as the absence versus presence of content support. Participants’ writing behaviors were recorded via keystroke logging software. Four writers, drawn from groups performing simple and complex tasks, additionally engaged in stimulated recall. Content support was found to lead to less pausing, more revision, and increased linguistic complexity. When content support was absent, more frequent pauses and revisions were associated with less sophisticated lexis. These results, combined with stimulated recall comments, suggest that content support likely reduced processing burden on planning processes, facilitating attention to linguistic encoding. Open Practices This article has been awarded an Open Materials badge. All materials are publicly accessible in the IRIS digital repository at http://www.iris-database.org. Learn more about the Open Practices badges from the Center for Open Science: https://osf.io/tvyxz/wiki.

show abstract

Fluency in Writing: A Multidimensional Perspective on Writing Fluency Applied to L1 and L2

Cited by 82 publications

References 39 publications

Tracking the Real‐Time Evolution of a Writing Event: Second Language Writers at Different Proficiency Levels

Tracking the Real‐Time Evolution of a Writing Event: Second Language Writers at Different Proficiency Levels

Pauses in written composition: on the importance of where writers pause

Effects of Task Complexity on L2 Writing Behaviors and Linguistic Complexity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About