Manipulating cognitive complexity across task types and its impact on learners' interaction during oral performance

Abstract

The goal of this study is to investigate the impact of manipulating the cognitive complexity of three different types of oral tasks on interaction. The study first considers the concepts of task complexity and interaction and then examines the specific studies that have looked at the effects of increasing task complexity on conversational interaction. In the experiment, learners of English as a foreign language organized into 27 dyads carry out three different types of tasks: a narrative reconstruction task, an instruction-giving map task, and a decision-making task. Two different versions of each task (Robinson 2001a(Robinson , 2003(Robinson , 2005(Robinson , 2007bSkehan and Foster 2001), and how different task types may variously affect the way interaction proceeds during task performance.

A Comparative Study on Mentor Text Modelling and Common Approaches to Teaching Writing in Iranian EFL Context

“…To provide a more specific definition, some scholars (e.g., Gilabert et al, 2009;Robinson, 2001) described task complexity as the level of variability that any particular learner experiences while performing different tasks. There are, however, other scholars (e.g., Ellis, 2003) who confined the scope of task complexity to a particular task's degree of difficulty.…”

Effects of Task Complexity Variables on Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency of Second Language Production: A Critical Review

“…In their study, Gilabert et al (2009) investigated the effects of +/-few elements and +/-no reasoning demand on learners' interaction. Sixty learners of English as a foreign language participated in the study.…”

Effects of cognitive demands on attention orientation in L2 oral production

“…Gilabert (2007) analyzed the effects of cognitive demands on accuracy and self-repairs as measures of learners' attention to form. In addition, Gilabert, Raron, and Llanes (2009) investigated the impact of cognitive demands on learners' oral interaction, focusing on interactional moves (i.e., negotiation of meaning, recasts, language-related episodes, and selfrepairs). Both studies concluded that increasing cognitive demands along the resource-directing variable generate more attention to form, even though there were slight differences in each task type.…”

“…Second, as previously mentioned, Gilabert et al (2009) explored the nature of attention to form through interactional moves. In usual task engagement, however, negotiations are triggered by communication breakdown.…”