Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of language.
By Martin Bygate. 2001
279 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Language and Linguistics
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/91c29da5b9ea0f82e9e0977a8fa682a7febfa163
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Language and Linguistics
- Judit Kormos
- M. Vercellotti
- P. Skehan
- Z. Dörnyei
- Parveneh Tavakoli
- Andrea Révész
- Junya Fukuta
- Pauline Foster
Citations in the corpus
- The Emergence of Complexity, Fluency, and Accuracy in the Oral and Written Production of Five Chinese Learners of English (2006, background): “Bygate (2001), for instance, has demonstrated how complexity and fluency (but not accuracy) improves when learners repeat a task, and Yuan and Ellis (2003), among others, have shown how planning time affects task performance.”
- Some benefits of peer–peer interaction: 10-year-old children practising with a communication task (2007, background): “Bygate’s work in the last decade has shown that in monologic tasks, repetition involves a special type of rehearsal where the learners can relate the repeated performance ‘to information kept in the long term memory store’ (Bygate, 2001: 28).”
- APTITUDE AND SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION (2005, background): “Task repetition (Bygate, 2001), and the provision of planning time (R. Ellis, in press; Foster & Skehan, 1996; Ortega, 1999) are two ways in which the demands of a task can be reduced, and these have been shown, in a number of cases, to positively affect the fluency of L2 production, with…”
- Learning from the transcripts of an oral communication task (2007, background): “…sort can allow learners to exploit their familiarity, gained during first performance, with the content and task demands, and with the process of formulating the desired meanings, so that they are able to devote more attention to getting the language right (Lynch and Maclean 2000; Bygate 2001).”
- The Development of Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in Second Language Performance: A Longitudinal Study (2017, background): “Bygate (2001) describes trade-off effects when comparing performances during interviews and narratives, but there were no trade-offs within these tasks.”
- Task Design and Second Language Performance: The Effect of Narrative Type on Learner Output (2008, background): “…resources the Conceptualizer will win (VanPatten, 1990), some of the research noted earlier Language Learning 58:2, June 2008, pp. 439–473 442 (Bygate, 2001; Ellis, 1987; Foster & Skehan, 1996; Lynch & Maclean, 2001; Mehnert, 1998) has suggested that it is possible to increase attentional…”
- The task is not enough: Processing approaches to task-based performance (2012, background): “It may be that the engagement during the first performance does enable better ‘packaging’ of ideas in the second (Bygate, 2001), and so raises complexity.”
- The effects of simultaneous use of careful online planning and task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency in EFL learners’ oral production (2011, methodology): “…el l a s in te rv ie w in g R ep ea tin g th e ta sk tw ic e w ith 1 0- w ee k in te rv al b et w ee n In cr ea se in fl ue nc y an d co m pl ex ity (1996) results were also corroborated in a more recent study carried out by Bygate and Samuda (2005), which was based on the dataset in Bygate (2001).”
- STUDENT USE OF THE MOTHER TONGUE IN THE TASK-BASED CLASSROOM (2007, methodology): “Another informant suggested that task repetition (Bygate 2001) might be a strategy to promote increased use of the TL: Maybea lot of tasks canbe rehearsed in theMTfirst.”
- Fluency Training in the ESL Classroom: An Experimental Study of Fluency Development and Proceduralization (2011, background): “Bygate (2001) found that repetition affected performance even when speeches were ten weeks apart.”
- Effects of task repetition on learners’ attention orientation in L2 oral production (2016, background): “As a result, learners have more processing space available for formulating the language to accomplish the task in the second performance (Gass, Mackey, Alvarez-Torres, & Fernández-García, 1999; Bygate, 2001; R. Ellis, 2003).”