TO THINK ALOUD OR NOT TO THINK ALOUD: The Issue of Reactivity in SLA Research Methodology

By R. Leow, K. Morgan‐Short. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2004

218 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Content familiarity, task repetition and Chinese EFL learners’ engagement in second language use (2017, background): “The stimulated recall interviews after the first performance may raise a reactivity issue (Leow & Morgan-Short, 2004), as the participants might have altered their second performances or their reports due to their awareness of being observed.”
STRATEGIES IN RESPONDING TO THE NEW TOEFL READING TASKS (2006, background): “As noted by Leow and Morgan-Short (2004), however, “all verbal reports are not equal” (p. 36).”
Video Listening Tests: What Are They Measuring? (2008, methodology): “3 However, the think aloud procedure used here was similar to Leow and Morgan-Short's (2003) procedure, in which the researchers found that having the participants think aloud while taking a reading comprehension test did not have a statistically significant effect on their performance on the test”
LEARNING WITHOUT AWARENESS REVISITED (2010, background): “…have provided some confl icting fi ndings in the fi eld of SLA: Four have reported nonreactive fi ndings (Bowles, 2008 ; Bowles & Leow, 2005 ; Leow & Morgan-Short, 2004 ; Sachs & Suh, 2007 ), one has reported negative reactivity, although this study differs because the L2 was used in the…”