The Cognition Hypothesis, second language task demands, and the SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing

Task-Based Language Teaching

Volumn 8, Issue , 2015, Pages 87-122

  Robinson, Peter ^a  

^a AOYAMA GAKUIN UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85083101040     PISSN: 1877346X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1075/tblt.8.04rob     Document Type: Chapter

References (214)

1. Achard, M. (2008). Teaching construal: Cognitive pedagogical grammar. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 431–455). London: Routledge.
2. Achard, M. & Niemeier, S. (Eds.). (2004). Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: 10.1515/9783110199857
3. Ackerman, P. (2003). Aptitude complexes and trait complexes. Educational Psychologist, 38, 85–93. DOI: 10.1207/S15326985EP3802_3
4. Altman, H. (Ed.). (1972). Individualizing the foreign language classroom. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
5. Andersen, R. (1984). The one-to-one principle of interlanguage construction. Language Learning, 34, 77–95. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1984.tb00353.x
6. Andersen, R. & Shirai, Y. (1996). The primacy of aspect in first and second language acquisition – The pidgin-creole connection. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 527–570). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
7. Astington, J., & Baird, J. (Eds.). (2005). Why language matters for theory of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195159912.001.0001
8. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman & Co.
9. Baralt, M. (2013). The impact of cognitive complexity on feedback efficacy during online versus face to face interactive tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 689–726. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263113000429
10. Baralt, M., Gilabert, R., & Robinson, P. (2014a). (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
11. Baralt, M., Gilabert, R., & Robinson, P. (2014b). An introduction to theory and research in task sequencing and instructed language learning. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert, & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning (pp. 1–34). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
12. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2007). One functional approach to second language acquisition: The concept-oriented approach. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 57–76). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. Bartsch, K. & Wellman, H. (1995). Children talk about the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Behrens, H. (2001). Cognitive-conceptual development and the acquisition of grammatical morphemes: The development of time concepts and verb tense. In M. Bowerman & S. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 450–474). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511620669.017
15. Berman, R. (2004). Between emergence and mastery: The long developmental route of language acquisition. In R. Berman (Ed.), Language development across childhood and adolescence (pp. 9–35). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/tilar.3.05ber
16. Berman, R., & Slobin, D. (Eds.) (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Bialystok, E. (1994). Analysis and control in the development of second language proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 157–168. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263100012857
18. Bowerman, M. & Levinson, S. (Eds.). (2001). Language acquisition and conceptual development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511620669
19. Brambor, T., Clark, W. & Golder, M. (2006). Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14, 63–82. DOI: 10.1093/pan/mpi014
20. Bylund, E. (2011). Language-specific patterns in event conceptualization: Insights from bilingualism. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Thinking and speaking in two languages (pp. 108–142). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
21. Cadierno, T. & Robinson, P. (2009). Language typology, task complexity and the development of L2 lexicalization patterns for describing motion events. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 245–276. DOI: 10.1075/arcl.7.10cad
22. Candlin, C. (1984). Syllabus design as a critical process. In C. Brumfit (Ed.), General English syllabus design (pp. 29–46). Oxford: Pergamon.
23. Carassa, A., Aprigliano, A. & Geminiani, G. (2000). Describers and explorers: A method for investigating cognitive maps. In S. O’Nuallain (Ed.), Spatial cognition (pp. 33–43). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/aicr.26.05car
24. Carroll, J. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511571312
25. Carroll, J. & Sapon, S. (1959). Modern Language Aptitude Test. Washington, DC: Second Language Testing Incorporated.
26. Collis, J. & Messick, S. (Eds.) (2001). Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
27. Cornell, E., Heth, D. & Alberts, D. (1994). Place recognition and way finding by children and adults. Memory and Cognition, 22, 633–643. DOI: 10.3758/BF03209249
28. Costa, P. & McCrae, R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
29. Cowan, N. (2005). Working memory capacity. New York, NY: Psychology Press. DOI: 10.4324/9780203342398
30. Craik, F. & Lockhart, R. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X
31. Crombie, W. (1985). Process and relation in discourse and language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32. Cronbach, L. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116–127. DOI: 10.1037/h0076829
33. Cronbach, L. & Snow, R. (1977). Aptitudes and instructional methods. New York, NY: Irvington.
34. de Bot, K., Lowie, W. & Verspoor, M. (2007). A dynamic systems theory of second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 7–21. DOI: 10.1017/S1366728906002732
35. Deary, I. (2000). Looking down on human intelligence: From psychometrics to the brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198524175.001.0001
36. Deissel, H. (2004). The acquisition of complex sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511486531
37. DeKeyser, R. (2001). Automaticity and automatization. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.125–151). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.007
38. Dornyei, Z. (2002). The motivational basis of language learning tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.137–158). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/lllt.2.10dor
39. Dornyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
40. Doughty, C. (2001). Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206–257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.010
41. Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.197–262). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42. Ehret, B., Gray, W. & Kirschenbaum, R. (2000). Contending with complexity: Developing and using a scaled world in applied cognitive research. Human Factors, 2, 8–23. DOI: 10.1518/001872000779656606
43. Eisenstein, M. (Ed.). (1989). The dynamic interlanguage. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4899-0900-8
44. Ellis, N. (1998). Emergentism, connectionism and second language learning. Language Learning, 48, 631–664. DOI: 10.1111/0023-8333.00063
45. Ellis, N. (2003). Constructions, chunking, and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 63–103). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch4
46. Ellis, N. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). Language emergence: Implications for Applied Linguistics – Introduction to the special issue. Applied Linguistics, 27, 558–589. DOI: 10.1093/applin/aml028
47. Ellis, N. & Robinson, P. (2008). An introduction to Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 3–24) London: Routledge.
48. Ellis, R. (1993). The structural syllabus and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 91–113. DOI: 10.2307/3586953
49. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language teaching and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
50. Ellis, R. (Ed.) (2005). Planning and second language task performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/lllt.11
51. Filopovic, L. (2007). Talking about motion – A crosslinguistic investigation of lexicalization patterns. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/slcs.91
52. Fine, S. (1974). Functional job analysis: An approach to technology for manpower planning. Personnel Journal, 11, 813–818.
53. Fleishman, E., & Quaintenance, M. (1984). Taxonomies of human performance: The description of human tasks. New York, NY: Academic Press.
54. Fries, C. (1952). The structure of English. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace and Company.
55. Furnham, E. & Ribchester, T. (1995). Tolerance of Ambiguity: A review of the concept, its measurement and applications. Current Psychology, 14, 179–199. DOI: 10.1007/BF02686907
56. Gagne, R., Wager, W., Golas, K. & Keller, J. (2005). Principles of instructional design, (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson.
57. Garcia Mayo, M.P. (Ed.) (2007). Investigating tasks in formal language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
58. Gilabert, R. (2005). Task complexity and L2 oral narrative production. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. University of Barcelona, Department of Applied Linguistics, Spain.
59. Gilabert, R. (2007). The simultaneous manipulation along the planning time and +/- Here-and-Now dimensions: Effects on oral L2 production. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 44–68). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
60. Gilabert, R., Baron, J. & Llanes, M. (2009). Manipulating task complexity across task types and its influence on learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 47, 367–395. DOI: 10.1515/iral.2009.016
61. Goldman, A. (2006). Simulating minds. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/0195138929.001.0001
62. Grange, J. & Houghten, G. (Eds.). (2014). Task switching and cognitive control. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
63. Han, Z., & Cadierno, T. (Eds.). (2010). Linguistic relativity in SLA: Thinking for speaking. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
64. Han, Z. & Odlin, T. (Eds.). (2006). Studies of fossilization in second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
65. Healy, A. & Kole, J. (2013). Rehearsal. In P. Robinson (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp. 553–555). New York, NY: Routledge.
66. Hoffman, R. & Militello, L. (2009). Perspectives on cognitive task analysis. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
67. Hollnagel, E. (2003). (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive task design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. DOI: 10.1201/9781410607775
68. Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (Eds.). (2012). Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/lllt.32
69. Huebner, T. (1983). A longtitudinal analysis of the acquisition of English. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.
70. Hulstijn, J. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of rehearsal, elaboration and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 349–381). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
71. Hulstijn, J. (2003). Incidental and intentional learning. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 631–678). Oxford: Blackwell.
72. Ishikawa, T. (2007). The effects of increasing task complexity along the -/+ Here-and-Now dimension. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating Tasks in Formal Language Learning (pp. 136–156). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
73. Ishikawa, T. (2008). Task complexity, reasoning demands and second language speech production. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Aoyama Gakuin University, Department of English, Tokyo, Japan.
74. Kim, Y. (2009). The effects of task complexity on learner-learner interaction. System, 37, 254–268. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2009.02.003
75. Kim, Y. & Tracy-Ventura, N. (2011). Task complexity, language anxiety and the development of the simple past. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 39–60). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/tblt.2.18ch11
76. Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007). Cognitive task complexity and linguistic performance in French L2 writing. In M. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 117–135). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
77. Langdon, R., Coltheart, M., Ward, P. & Catts, S. (2002). Disturbed communication in schizophrenia: The role of pragmatics and poor theory-of-mind. Psychological Medicine, 32, 1273–1284. DOI: 10.1017/S0033291702006396
78. Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L. (2007). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
79. Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. London: Longman.
80. Lee, E. & Rescorla, L. (2002). The use of psychological state terms by late talkers at age 3. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23, 623–641. DOI: 10.1017/S014271640200406X
81. Lesgold, A. (2001). The nature and methods of learning by doing. American Psychologist, 56, 964–973. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.56.11.964
82. Levkina, M. & Gilabert, R. (2014). Task sequencing in the L2 development of spatial expressions. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning. (pp. 37–71). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
83. Li, Ping & Shirai, Y. (2000). The acquisition of lexical and grammatical aspect. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: 10.1515/9783110800715
84. Lohman, D. (2000). Complex information processing and intelligence. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Intelligence (pp. 285–340). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511807947.015
85. Lohman, H. & Tomasello, M. (2003). The role of language in the development of false belief Under-standing: A training study. Child Development, 74, 1130–1144. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8624.00597
86. Long, M. (1985). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modeling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 77–99). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
87. Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/sibil.2.07lon
88. Long, M. (2003). Stabilization and fossilization in interlanguage. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 487–536). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch16
89. Long, M. (2006). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
90. Long, M. (2014). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Oxford: Blackwell.
91. Long, M. & Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 27–56. DOI: 10.2307/3587368
92. Long, M. & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
93. MacIntyre, P. (2002). Motivation, anxiety and emotion in second language acquisition. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 45–64). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/lllt.2.05mac
94. Mackey, A. (2007). (Ed.), Conversational interaction in SLA. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
95. Mackey, A., Philp, J., Egi, T., Fujii, A. & Tatsumi, T. (2002). Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback and L2 development. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 181–210). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/lllt.2.12mac
96. Malicka, A. (2014). The role of task sequencing in monologic oral production. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning. (pp. 71–93). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
97. Malle, B. (2004). How the mind explains behavior. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
98. Martin, K. & Ellis, N. (2012). The roles of phonological STM and Working Memory in L2 grammar and vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 379–414. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263112000125
99. Matthews, G. & Deary, I. (1998). Personality traits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
100. McCormick, E. (1979). Job Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York, NY: AMACOM Publishing.
101. Meisel, J. (1987). Reference to past events and actions in the development of natural second language acquisition. In C. Pfaff (Ed.), First and second language acquisition processes (pp. 206–224). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
102. Michel, M. (2013). Effects of task complexity on the use of conjunctions in oral L2 task performance. Modern Language Journal, 97, 178–195. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.01431.x
103. Michel, M.C., Kuiken, F. & Vedder, I. (2007). The influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch L2. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45 (3), 241–259.
104. Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7 (3), 134–140. DOI: 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7
105. Munoz, C. (Ed) (2006). Age and the rate of second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
106. Niwa, Y. (2000). Reasoning demands of L2 tasks and L2 narrative production: Effects of individual differences in working memory, intelligence and aptitude. Unpublished M.A. dissertation. Aoyama Gakuin University, Department of English, Tokyo, Japan.
107. Nixon, S. (2005). Mental state verb production and sentential complements in four-year-old children. First Language, 25, 19–39. DOI: 10.1177/0142723705046898
108. North, R. & Riley, V. (1989). WINDEX: A predictive model of operator workload. In G. McMillan, D. Beevis, E. Sala, M. Strub, R. Sutton & L. Van Breda (Eds.), Applications of human performance models to systems design (pp. 81–89). New York, NY: Plenum. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4757-9244-7_6
109. Nuevo, A. (2006). Task complexity and interaction: L2 learning opportunities and interaction. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. Georgetown University, Washington DC.
110. Nyborg, H. (Ed.). (2003). The scientific study of general intelligence. New York, NY: Pergamon.
111. Odlin, T. (2008). Conceptual transfer and meaning extensions. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 306–340). London: Routledge.
112. Ortega, L. (2009). Sequences and processes in language learning. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp. 81–107). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI: 10.1002/9781444315783.ch6
113. Ortega, L. & Byrnes, H. (Eds.). (2008). The longtitudinal study of advanced L2 capacities. New York, NY: Routledge.
114. Pang, F. & Skehan, P. (2014). Self-reported planning behaviour and second language performance. in narrative retellings. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspective on task performance. (pp. 95–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/tblt.5.04pan
115. Parks, D. & Boueck, G. (1989). Workload prediction, diagnosis and continuing challenges. In G. McMillan, D. Beevis, E. Sala, M. Strub, R. Sutton & L. Van Breda (Eds.), Applications of human performance models to systems design (pp. 47–64). New York, NY: Plenum. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4757-9244-7_4
116. Pavlenko, A. (Ed.) (2011). Thinking and speaking in two languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
117. Pavlenko, A. & Jarvis, S. (2007). Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York, NY: Routledge.
118. Perdue, C. (Ed.). (1993a). Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives, Vol. 1: Field methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
119. Perdue, C. (Ed.). (1993b). Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives, Vol. 2: The results. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
120. Pica, T., Kanagy, R. & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language teaching and research. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks in language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 9–34). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
121. Plough, I. & Gass, S. (1993). Interlocutor and task familiarity: Effects on interactional structure. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (95–122). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
122. Prabhu, N.S. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
123. Putz, M., Niemeier, S. & Dirven, R. (2001). (Eds.) Applied Cognitive Linguistics I1: Language pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
124. Révész, A. (2009). Task complexity, focus on form and second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 437–470. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263109090366
125. Révész, A. (2011). Task complexity, focus on L2 constructions, and individual differences: A classroom-based study. Modern Language Journal, 95, 162–181. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01241.x
126. Rezaei, S. & Kashani, A. (2011). Task complexity, language proficiency and task-based writing. Saarbrucken: VDM Verlag Dr. Muller.
127. Riegeluth, C. (Ed.). (1999a). Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
128. Riegeluth, C. (1999b). The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence. In C. Riegeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II (pp. 425–453). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
129. Riegeluth, C. & Carr-Chelman, A. (2009). Understanding instructional theory. In C. Riegeluth & A. Carr-Chelman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base, Vol. III (pp. 3–26). New York, NY: Routledge.
130. Ringbom, H. (2006). Cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
131. Robinson, P. (1995). Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45, 99–140. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00964.x
132. Robinson, P. (1996). Connecting tasks, cognition and syllabus design. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Task complexity and second language syllabus design: Data-based Studies and Speculations (pp. 1–16). Brisbane: University of Queensland Working Papers in Applied Linguistics.
133. Robinson, P. (1997). Generalizability and automaticity of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced and rule-search conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 223–247. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263197002052
134. Robinson, P. (2001a). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 27–57. DOI: 10.1093/applin/22.1.27
135. Robinson, P. (2001b). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.012
136. Robinson, P. (2001c). Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes, and learning conditions in SLA. Second Language Research, 17, 368–392. DOI: 10.1191/026765801681495877
137. Robinson, P. (2002a). Learning conditions, aptitude complexes and SLA: A framework for research and pedagogy. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.113–133). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/lllt.2.08rob
138. Robinson, P. (2002b). Individual differences in intelligence, aptitude and working memory during adult incidental second language learning: A replication and extension of Reber, Walkenfeld and Hernstadt (1991). In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 211–266). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/lllt.2.13rob
139. Robinson, P. (2002c). (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/lllt.2
140. Robinson, P. (2003a). Attention and memory during SLA. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 631–678). Oxford: Blackwell.
141. Robinson, P. (2003b). The Cognition Hypothesis, task design and adult task-based language learning. Second Language Studies, 21, (2), 45–107. 〈http://www.hawaii.edu/sls/uhwpesl/21 (2)/ Robinson.pdf〉
142. Robinson, P. (2005a). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: A review of studies in a Componential Framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43,1–32. DOI: 10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1
143. Robinson, P. (2005b). Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 45–73. DOI: 10.1017/S0267190505000036
144. Robinson, P. (2005c). Cognitive abilities, chunk-strength, and frequency effects in implicit artificial grammar and incidental L2 learning: Replications of Reber, Walkenfeld and Hernstadt (1991) and Knowlton and Squire (1996) and their relevance for SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 235–268. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263105050126
145. Robinson, P. (2007a). Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 7–27). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
146. Robinson, P. (2007b). Aptitudes, abilities, contexts and practice. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in second language learning: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 256–286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
147. Robinson, P. (2007c). Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 193–214.
148. Robinson, P. (2009). Syllabus design. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp. 294–310). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI: 10.1002/9781444315783.ch17
149. Robinson, P. (2011a). (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
150. Robinson, P. (2011b). Second language task complexity, the Cogntition Hypothesis, language learning, and performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 3–37). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/tblt.2.05ch1
151. Robinson, P. (2011c). Task-based language learning: A review of issues. Language Learning, 61 (S1), 1–36. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00641.x
152. Robinson, P. (2012a). Individual differences, aptitude complexes, SLA processes, and aptitude test development. In M. Pawlak (Ed.), New perspectives on individual differences in second language learning and teaching (pp. 57–77). New York, NY: Springer.
153. Robinson, P. (2012b). Abilities to learn: Cognitive abilities. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 17–20). New York, NY: Springer.
154. Robinson, P. (2013). Aptitude in second language acquisition. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 129–133). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
155. Robinson, P., Cadierno, T. & Shirai, Y. (2009). Time and motion: Measuring the effects of the conceptual demands of tasks on second language production. Applied Linguistics, 28, 533–554. DOI: 10.1093/applin/amp046
156. Robinson, P. & Ellis, N. (Eds.) (2008a). Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. New York, NY: Routledge.
157. Robinson, P. & Ellis, N. (2008b). Cognitive Linguistics, Second Language Acquisition and instruction – Issues for research. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 489–546). New York, NY: Routledge.
158. Robinson, P. & Gilabert, R. (2007). (Eds.), Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language instruction.[Special issue] International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45(3). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
159. Robinson, P. & Ha, M. (1993). Instance theory and second language rule learning under explicit conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 413–438. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263100012365
160. Roeser, R., Shavelson, R., Kupermintz, H. & Lau, S. (2002). The concept of aptitude and multidimensional validity revisited. Educational Assessment, 8 (2), 191–205. DOI: 10.1207/S15326977EA0802_06
161. Sachs, J. (1983). Talking about the there and then: The emergence of displaced reference in parent-child discourse. In K. Nelson (Ed.), Children`s language, Vol. 4 (pp.1–28). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
162. Samuda, V. & Bygate, M. (2008). Tasks in second language learning. Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan.
163. Sato, C. (1990). The syntax of conversation in interlanguage development. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
164. Schank, R. (1999). Dynamic memory revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511527920
165. Schank, R. & Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
166. Schank, R., Berman, T. & Macpherson, K. (1999). Learning by doing. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II, (pp. 161–182). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
167. Schneider, W., Schumann-Hengsteler, R., & Sodian, B. (2005). (Eds.), Young children`s cognitive development: Interrelationships among executive functioning, working memory, verbal ability, and theory of mind. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
168. Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003
169. Schmiedtova, B., von Stutterheim, C., & Carroll, M. (2011). Language specific patterns in event construal of advanced second language speakers. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Thinking and speaking in two languages (pp. 66–107). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
170. Seel, N. (2012). Schema development. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp.2936–2939). New York, NY: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_365
171. Segalowitz, N. (2003). Automaticity and second languages. In C. Doughty & M.H. Long (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, pp. 382–408. Oxford: Blackwell.
172. Segalowitz, N. (2013). Automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp. 53–57). New York, NY: Routledge.
173. Sheen, Y. (2008). Recasts, language anxiety, modified output and L2 learning. Language Learning, 58, 833–874. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00480.x
174. Shirai, Y. (1999). The prototype hypothesis of tense aspect acquisition. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Representation and process: Proceedings of the 3rd Pacific Second Language Research Forum, Vol 1. (pp. 151–164). Tokyo: PACSLRF.
175. Shuell, T. (1980). Learning theory, instructional theory and adaptation. In R. Snow, P. Federico & W. Montague (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction, Vol. 2: Cognitive process analyses of learning and problem solving (pp. 277–302). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
176. Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second language acquisition. London: Arnold.
177. Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
178. Skehan, P. (2002). Theorizing and updating aptitude. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 69–94). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
179. Skehan, P. (2012). Language aptitude. In S. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 381–395). New York, NY: Routledge. DOI: 10.1075/lllt.2.06ske
180. Skehan, P. (2014a) (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
181. Skehan, P. (2014b). The context for researching a processing perspective on task performance. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. (pp. 1–26). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/tblt.5
182. Skehan, P. (2014c). Limited attentional capacity, second language performance and task-based pedagogy. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. (pp. 211–262). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/tblt.5.01ske
183. Skehan, P. & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.009
184. Slobin, D. (1993). Adult language acquisition: A view from child language study. In C. Perdue (Ed.), Adult language acquisition: Crosslinguistic perspectives, Vol. 2: The results (pp. 239–252). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
185. Slobin, D. (1996). From ‘thought and language’ to ‘thinking for speaking’. In J. Gumperz & S. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
186. Slobin, D. (2003). Language and thought online: Some cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the investigation of language and thought (pp. 157–191). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
187. Snow, R. (1987). Aptitude complexes. In R. Snow & M. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction, Vol. 3: Conative and affective process analysis, (pp. 11–34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
188. Snow, R. (1994). Abilities in academic tasks. In R. Sternberg & R. Wagner (Eds.), Mind in context: Interactionist perspectives on human intelligence, (pp. 3–37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
189. Snow, R. & Farr, M.(1987). (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction Vol. 3: Conative and affective process analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
190. Snow, R., Federico, P. & Montague, W. (1980). (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction Vols 1 & 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
191. Snow, R., Kyllonen, P. & Marshalek, B. (1984). The topography of ability and learning correlations. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp.47–103). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
192. Sokal, R. (1974). Classification: Purposes, principles, progress, prospects. Science, 185, 1115–1123. DOI: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1115
193. Spilsbury, G., Stankov, L. & Roberts, R. (1990). The effects of a task’s difficulty on its correlation with intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 1069–1077. DOI: 10.1016/0191-8869(90)90135-E
194. Stanovitch, K. (2000). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
195. Talmy, L. (2000). Towards a cognitive semantics, Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
196. Talmy, L. (2008). Aspects of attention in language. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 27–38) London: Routledge.
197. Trebits, A. (2015). Sources of individual differences in L2 narrative production: The contribution of input, processing, and output anxiety. Applied Linguistics, 36. first published online April 8, 2014. DOI: 10.1093/applin/amu006
198. Trim, J. & North, B. (Eds.). (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching and assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
199. Tyler, A. (2008). Cognitive linguistics and second language instruction. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 456–488) London: Routledge.
200. Tyler, A. (2012). Cognitive linguistics and second language learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
201. Tyler, A. & Evans, V. (2003). The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
202. Van den Branden, K. (2006). (Ed.) Task-based language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511667282
203. Van Ek, J. (1976). The threshold level for modern language learning in schools. London: Longman.
204. Van Geert, P. (2008). The Dynamic Systems approach in the study of L1 and L2 acquisition: An introduction. Modern Language Journal, 92, 179–199.
205. von Stutterheim, C., Flecken, M. & Carroll, M. (2013). Introduction: Conceptualizing in a second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 51, 77–85.
206. von Stutterheim, C. & Klein, W. (1987). A concept-oriented approach to second language studies. In C. Pfaff (Ed.), First and second language acquisition processes (pp. 191–205). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
207. von Stutterheim, C. & Nuese, R. (2003). Processes of conceptualisation in language production: Language specific perspectives and event construal. Linguistics, 41, 851–888.
208. Wen, Z., Mota, M. & McNeill, A. (Eds.). (2015). Working Memory in second language acquisition and processing. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
209. Wilkins, D. (1976). Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
210. Williams, J. (1999). Attention, memory and inductive learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 1–48. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263199001011
211. Williams, R. (1977). A behavioral typology of educational objectives for the cognitive domain. Educational Technology, 17, 418–431.
212. Willis, D. (1990). The lexical syllabus: A new approach to language teaching. London: Collins.
213. Wood, R. (1986). Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 60–82. DOI: 10.1016/0749-5978(86)90044-0
214. Yule, G. & MacDonald, M. (1990). Resolving referential conflicts in L2 interaction: The effect of proficiency and interactive role. Language Learning, 40, 539–556. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00605.x