OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT KNOWLEDGE: Response to R. Ellis (2005) and Some Recommendations for Future Research in This Area

Abstract

This article comprises two parts. The first part is a critique of R. Ellis's (2005) psychometric study, which attempted to use an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to establish operationalizations of the constructs of explicit and implicit knowledge. I argue that the choice of an EFA in this endeavor is misguided and that a confirmatory factor analysis should have been employed. Additionally, the specific execution of the EFA is criticized on a number of fronts. The major claim of the critique is that R. Ellis's study does not successfully demonstrate that his operationalizations are reducible to the two factors of implicit and explicit knowledge. The second part of this article goes on to make some methodological recommendations for future research in this area. Finally, the potential of structural equation modeling is pointed out as a response to Hulstijn's (2005) warning concerning the pitfalls of extreme rationalism and extreme empiricism within the future research trajectory of explicit and implicit knowledge.

Validating an Elicited Imitation Task as a Measure of Implicit Knowledge: Comparisons With Other Validation Studies

“…R. Ellis interpreted the two factors as analogous to implicit and explicit L2 knowledge, respectively. In response to the critique by Isemonger () that confirmatory rather than exploratory factor analysis would have been a more appropriate choice in a verificational study, R. Ellis and Loewen () reanalyzed the data reported in R. Ellis () using confirmatory factor analysis. The results confirmed the two‐factor model with the elicited oral imitation task, the oral narration task, and the timed grammaticality judgment test loading on one factor and the untimed grammaticality judgment test and the metalinguistic knowledge test loading on the other.…”

German pitches in English: Production and perception of cross-varietal differences in L2

“…Further studies have identified numerous sources and causes for the production and perception of FA in L2 speech: different acquisition scenarios, i.e. simultaneous multilingualism/bilingualism (Genesee, 2000; Meisel, 2001, 2004) vs. sequential multilingualism/bilingualism (Lakshmanan, 1994; McLaughlin, 1978),the mode of language learning (instructed vs. naturalistic language learning, DeKeyser, 2003; Ellis, 2006, 2007; Isemonger, 2007), andother external factors including sociological and cultural background, situational, contextual and procedural variables and learner-specific factors (including cognitive, motivational and emotional factors and personality traits, Bayley & Langman, 2004; Bayley & Regan, 2004; Dewaele, 2004; Dörnyei, 2009, Flege, Birdsong, Bialystok, Mack, Sung & Tsukada, 2006; Major, 2004; see Piske, MacKay & Flege, 2001, for an overview).…”

“…the mode of language learning (instructed vs. naturalistic language learning, DeKeyser, 2003; Ellis, 2006, 2007; Isemonger, 2007), and…”

The use of statistics in L2 acquisition research

“…critiquesEllis' (2005) use of statistical procedures and criticizes his use of exploratory factor analysis to investigate the constructs of implicit and explicit L2 knowledge. He suggests the use of confirmatory factor analysis or structural equation modeling as more appropriate in this instance, as well as for future research 2007. Ellis, R. & S. Loewen(2007).…”

“…He suggests the use of confirmatory factor analysis or structural equation modeling as more appropriate in this instance, as well as for future research 2007. Ellis, R. & S. Loewen(2007). Confirming the operational definitions of explicit and implicit knowledge inEllis (2005): Responding to Isemonger.…”