Processing instruction: An update

By B. Vanpatten. 2002

524 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Language and Linguistics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/773aa30004a962dd9633819d881103774bab2d55

How researchers see this paper

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

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Language and Linguistics

Citations in the corpus

AT THE INTERFACE: DYNAMIC INTERACTIONS OF EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT LANGUAGE KNOWLEDGE (2005, background): “…analyses of attention in SLA ~N+ Ellis, 2002b; Robinson, 2003; Schmidt, 2001!, focus on form ~Doughty, 2001!, input processing ~Gass, 1997; VanPatten, 1996, 2002!, skill theory and output practice ~DeKeyser, 2001; DeKeyser & Sokalski, 1996! and combinations thereof ~N+ Ellis, 2002b; R+…”
PROCESSING INSTRUCTION AND MEANINGFUL OUTPUT-BASED INSTRUCTION:: Effects on Second Language Development (2006, methodology): “—to which PI has often been compared—results in learned linguistic knowledge ~VanPatten & Cadierno!+ Although VanPatten ~2002, p+ 762! recently asserted that “output may play a number of important roles in language development” and that, in fact, it plays a facilitative role in acquisition ~VanPatte”
The influence of first language on the processing of wh-movement in English as a second language (2005, methodology): “With this problem in mind, VanPatten has developed a technique of instruction based on ‘input processing’ which fosters a specific kind of comprehension, which, he claims, is necessary and sufficient for the development of L2 competence (VanPatten, 1996; 2002; see also DeKeyser et al., 2002).”
COMMUNICATIVE FOCUS ON FORM AND SECOND LANGUAGE SUPRASEGMENTAL LEARNING (2014, background): “VanPatten, 2002) as well as the proceduralization of declarative knowledge in meaningful contexts (e.g., DeKeyser, 2007), both of which may in turn enable L2 learners to transfer what they have learned to other communicative contexts outside of the classroom (Lightbown, 2008).”
Processing and learning of enhanced English collocations: An eye movement study (2017, methodology): “…saliency provided by textual enhancement encourages L2 learners to spend more time processing the target linguistic features (e.g. grammar and lexis, including collocations), resulting in better learning and recall of such features (Long, 1991; Robinson, 2003; Schmidt, 2001; VanPatten, 2002).”
Replication in Second Language Research: Narrative and Systematic Reviews and Recommendations for the Field. (2018, background): “…questions using similar designs and materials’), a very large number of studies could be called replications (see Plonsky’s 2012 discussion of the extent to which studies included in a meta-analysis could be considered to be replications; and see VanPatten, 2002a&b for narrower conceptualisations).”
The Evidence is IN: Drills are OUT (2003, methodology): “Appendix A presents a list of strategies and processing principles as described in VanPatten (2003b); we also refer the reader to publications that take up both input processing and processing instruction in detail (e.g., VanPatten, 2002, 2003a, 2003b; Wong, 2002, 2003a).”
The effects of processing instruction, traditional instruction and meaning—output instruction on the acquisition of the English past simple tense (2005, background): “VanPatten has suggested (VanPatten 1996; 2002) that PI provides a more effective practice (through structured input practice) than TI, as it equips learners with the tools to convert input into intake.”