Cognition Hypothesis References

 

'The Cognition Hypothesis, second language task demands, and the SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing'. (2015). In Martin Bygate (Ed.), Domains and Directions in the Development of Task-Based Language Teaching; Plenaries from a Decade of the International Conference. (Chapter 4). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Task Sequencing and Instructed Second Language Learning. (2014). (c0-edited with Melissa Baralt and Roger Gilabert). London: Bloomsbury Academic.

'An introduction to theory and research in task sequencing and instructed second language learning'. (2014) (with Melissa Baralt and Roger Gilabert). In Melissa Baralt, Roger Gilabert & Peter Robinson (Eds.), Task Sequencing and Instructed Second Language Learning (Chapter 1, pp.1-34). London: Bloomsbury Academic.

'Syllabus design'. (2013 ). In Carol Chapelle (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.

'Task-based learning: Cognitive underpinnings'. (2013 ) (with Roger Gilabert). In Carol Chapelle (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.

Task-Based Language Learning. (2011). Oxford:Wiley-Blackwell.

' Task-based language learning: A review of issues'. (2011). In Peter Robinson (Ed.), Task-Based Language Learning. (Chapter 1, pp.1-36). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Task-Based Language Learning [Special Issue ] Language Learning, 61 (Supplement 1). (Edited). (2011). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Second Language Task Complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of Language Learning and Performance. (2011). Amsterdam/Philadelphia:Benjamins.

'Second language task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis, language learning, and performance' . (2011). In Peter Robinson (Ed.), Second Language Task Complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of Language Learning and Performance. (Chapter 1, pp. 3-37). Amsterdam/Philadelphia:Benjamins.

'Situating and disributing cognition across task demands: The SSARC model of task sequencing'. (2010). In Martin Putz & Laura Sicola (Eds.), Inside the Learner's Mind: Cognitive Processing in Second Language Acquisition. (Chapter 13, pp. 243-268.)Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

'Language typology, task complexity and reference to motion events in a second language'. (2009) (with Teresa Cadierno). In Nick Ellis & Teresa Cadierno (Eds.), Reconstructing a Second Language [Special issue ] Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7: 245-276. Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter.

'Time and motion: Measuring the effects of the conceptual demands of tasks on second language speech production'. (2009) (with Teresa Cadierno and Yas Shirai). In Alex Housen & Folkert Kuiken (Eds.), Methodological and Conceptual Issues In Assessing Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency [Special issue ] Applied Linguistics 30 (4): 533-554. Oxford University Press.

'Syllabus design'. (2009).In Michael H. Long and Catherine  M. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of Language Teaching, (Chapter 20, pp. 294-310). Oxford: Blackwell.

Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. (2008). (Co-edited with Nick Ellis). New York/London: Routledge.

'Conclusions: Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and L2 instruction—issues for research.' (2008) (with Nick Ellis). In Peter Robinson & Nick Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. (Chapter 19, pp. 489-545). New York/London: Routledge.

'An introduction to cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and instruction'.(2008) (with Nick Ellis). In Peter Robinson & Nick Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). New York/London: Routledge.

Task Complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and Second Language Instruction [Special Issue] International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL) 45 (3) . (2007). (Co-edited with Roger Gilabert). Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter.

’Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language learning and performance'. (2007) (with Roger Gilabert). In Peter Robinson & Roger Gilabert (Eds.), Task Complexity and Second Language Instruction [Special Issue]  International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL) 45 (3): 161-176. Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter.

'Task complexity, theory of mind and intentional reasoning: Effects on speech production, intraction, uptake, and perceptions of task difficulty. (2007). In Peter Robinson & Roger Gilabert (Eds.), Task Complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and Second Language Instruction [Special Issue]  International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL) 45 (3):193-215. Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter.

'Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks'. (2007). In Maria del Pilar Garcia-Mayo (Ed.), Investigating Tasks in Formal Language Learning. (Chapter 1, pp.7-27). Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.

'Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a Componential Framework for second language task design.' (2005). International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 43, (1):1--32. Mouton de Gruyter.

'Comprehension, cognitive complexity, and task-based language production and acquisition.' (2004). In Donald L. Smith, Shuichi Nobe, Peter Robinson, Gregory J. Strong, Minako Tani, & Hiroshi Yoshiba , Language and Comprehension: Perspectives from Linguistics and Language Education, (Chapter 8, pp. 187-240). Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishing.

Language and Comprehension: Perspectives from Linguistics and Language Education. (2004)  (Co-authored with Donald L. Smith, Shuichi Nobe, Gregory Strong, Minako Tani & Hiroshi Yoshiba). Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishing.

'The Cognition Hypothesis, task design and adult task-based language learning.' (2003). Second Language Studies, 21, (2): 45-107. University of Hawai'i.

'Attention and memory during SLA'. (2003). In Catherine Doughty & Michael H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, (Chapter 19). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

‘What gets processed in processing instruction? A commentary on Bill VanPatten’s "Processing instruction: An update." (2002) (with Robert DeKeyser, Rafael Salaberry and Michael Harrington). Language Learning, 52, (4):805-824. 

‘The Cognition Hypothesis of task-based L2 development: Theory and research’. (2002) Journal of the Korean English Education Society, 2, 1-26.

'Task complexity, cognitive resources and second language syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA.' (2001). In Peter Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and Second Language Instruction. (Chapter 10, pp. 285-317). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cognition and Second Language Instruction. (2001). (Edited collection). Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press

'Task complexity, task difficulty and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework'. (2001). Applied Linguistics, 22, (1): 27-57.

'State of the Art: SLA theory and second language syllabus design'. (1998). The Language Teacher, 22, (4):7-13.

'Giving pushed output a push: The role of task complexity'. (1997). Clarion, EUROSLA Newsletter, 3, 2: 22-24.

'The development of task-based assessment in English for Academic Purposes programs.' (1996) (with Steven Ross) . Applied Linguistics, 17, (4):455-476.

'Introduction: Connecting tasks, cognition and syllabus design'. (1996). In Peter Robinson (Ed.), Task Complexity and Second Language Syllabus Design: Data-based Studies and Speculations, (pp.1-16). University of Queensland Working Papers in Language and Linguistics (Special Issue), Brisbane: CLTR.

'Three dimensions of second language task complexity'. (1996) (with Sarah Ting & Jianjun Urwin). In Peter Robinson (Ed.), Task Complexity and Second Language Syllabus Design: Data-based Studies and Speculations, (pp.17-36). University of Queensland Working Papers in Language and Linguistics (Special Issue), Brisbane: CLTR.

'Task-based testing, performance referencing and ESL program development'. (1996). In Peter Robinson (Ed.), Task Complexity and Second Language Syllabus Design: Data-based Studies and Speculations, (pp. 95-116). University of Queensland Working Papers in Language and Linguistics (Special Issue), Brisbane: CLTR.

Task Complexity and Second Language Syllabus Design: Data-based Studies and Speculations. (1996). (Edited collection). University of Queensland Working Papers in Language and Linguistics (Special Issue), Brisbane: CLTR.

'Investigating second language task complexity.' (with Sarah Ting & Jianjun Urwin) (1995). RELC Journal, 26, (2):62-79.

'Task complexity and second language narrative discourse.' (1995). Language Learning, 45, (1):99-140.

'Implicit knowledge, second language learning and syllabus construction.' (1994). TESOL Quarterly, 28, (1):161-166.

'Review of "Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom" by David Nunan.' (1993). Applied Linguistics, 14, (4):442-446.

‘Parallels in child and adult language development
How is Cromer’s (1974)‘Cognition Hypothesis’ of L1 acquisition—that conceptual, and cognitive development, creates the impetus for language development—relevant to adult task-based L2 development (Robinson 1996c, 1997c, 2001a, 2001b, 2002a) and the pedagogic issue of the grading and sequencing of learning tasks based on differentials in their cognitive demands? I want to argue that it is, but with an obvious caveat, that Slobin makes clear. In discussing the parallels between child and adult language development in the emergence of prepositions for marking first topological relations of neighbourhood, and containment, and later, axis-based projective relations of between, front/backness, in the ESF project data (see Purdue, 1993) Slobin comments as follows:

        The parallels, though, cannot be attributed to the same underlying factors. In the case of FLA one appeals to cognitive development: the projective notions simply are not available to very young children. But in the case of ALA all of the relevant cognitive machinery is in place. Why, then, should learners have difficulty in discovering the necessary prepositions for spatial relations that they already command in the L1. There are at least two possibilities: (1) adult learners retain a scale of conceptual complexity, based on their own cognitive development, and at first search the TL for the grammatical marking of those notions which represent some primordial core of basicness or simplicity; and/or (2) these most basic notions are also used with relatively greater frequency in the TL…It is likely that speakers, generally, have less recourse to the encoding of complex notions, and that learners are simply reflecting the relative frequency of occurrence of various prepositions in the input…Or it may be that the complex relations are, indeed, communicated above some threshold of frequency, but that learners ‘gate them out’ due to their complexity. In this case cognitive factors play a role in both FLA and ALA, but for different reasons: the complex notions are not available to very young children, while they are available but not accessed in early stages of ALA. (Slobin, 1993, p. 243).

With possibilities 1) and 2) above in mind, then I want to argue that increasing the cognitive demands of pedagogic tasks:
—provides a basis for sequencing pedagogic tasks in a task-based syllabus, since it allows the processing and other performance demands of real world target tasks to be gradually approximated over a course of instruction;
—and that such sequencing may have important, predictable, effects on learner production (pushing learners to greater lexical density, grammaticalization and syntacticization);
—and may also have important effects on learning (creating the conditions for noticing and uptake of aspects of input made salient through interventions, such as flooding, input enhancement, and recasting). These claims constitute the Cognition Hypothesis of adult task-based language learning, and rest on a number of assumptions, some of which may turn out not to be necessary, and some of which may turn out not to be true.

1) Child L1 and adult L2 development are fundamentally different
While there are parallels between them, as described above, child and adult language acquisition differ, since adults have no access to the ‘general’ innate knowledge guiding L1 and child L2 development, and since adults (unlike children) have highly developed (meta)cognitive and (meta)linguistic capacities which they often automatically bring to bear on L2 learning .

2 ) The Cognition Hypothesis cannot explain child L1 development
While a strong form of the cognition hypothesis (Cromer, 1974; cf, Berman, 1987; Slobin, 1973; Weist, Lyytinen, Wysocka & Atanassova, 1997), that conceptual development pushes linguistic development, cannot be maintained for L1 acquisition, given a) the facts of normal language development in children with cognitive deficits (e.g., Williams syndrome, see Cromer, 1989, 1991), and b) the availability of innate, possibly modular, language knowledge in childhood, it may be possible to base a rationale for promoting adult task-based learning on a strong form of the hypothesis, given 1 above, and 3 below.

3) The Cognition Hypothesis provides a rationale for promoting task-based L2 development through task sequencing and design decisions
The claim made here is that it is possible to stage increases in the cognitive demands of language learning tasks which recapitulate the ontogenetic course of conceptual development in childhood. e.g.,
— from tasks in the here and now, to tasks requiring reference to the there and then;
— from tasks requiring spatial description that can be completed by establishing and describing topological relations to those requiring spatial descriptions that must be completed by establishing and describing axis-based relations, which themselves emerge in the order vertical axis< lateral axis< sagittal axis ;
— or from tasks requiring simple narrative description of successive actions, with no causal reasoning to establish event relations, to those requiring narrative description of simultaneous actions, and ‘theory of mind’ reasoning about participants intentions.

4 ) There is a natural order for sequencing L2 task demands
Such staged increases in the cognitive demands of tasks may therefore provide the learner with optimal (i.e., ontogenetically natural) contexts for making the form-function mappings necessary to L2 development. This would be a way of operationalizing sequencing decisions in line with Slobin’s first possibility for explaining adult-child parallels in language development cited above, that ; ‘ adult learners retain a scale of conceptual complexity, based on their own cognitive development, and at first search the TL for the grammatical marking of those notions which represent some primordial core of basicness or simplicity’.

5) Individual differences affect adult L2 task performance Individual differences in L2 development are clearly more apparent than they are in L1 development; ALL adult learning—contrary to Krashen’s (1982), and Reber's, (1989; Reber & Allen, 2000; Reber, Walkenfield & Hernstadt, 1991) claims for 'acquisition' and 'implicit' learning—is subject to variation attributable, at least in part, to differences in the cognitive resources (attentional allocation, and memory capacity) that learners bring to the learning context (see Robinson 1995b, 1995c, 1997a, 2001c, 2002b, 2002c). Individual differences in cognitive resources, and the abilities they contribute to, should increasingly differentiate performance and learning as tasks increase in complexity . 6) Task complexity pushes output, AND L2 learning Bearing in mind the variation attributable to individual differences in the availability of cognitive resources, increasing the cognitive demands of L2 tasks (Niwa, 2000; Robinson 1995a, 2001 a, 2001b, 2002a) will in general (i.e., when research uses group comparisons of performance on tasks at diffent levels of complexity) lead to greater functional differentiation of learner language use (Givon, 1985; Newton & Kennedy, 1996), and greater attention to output, and depth of processing of input, with the consequences, a) of speeding development through stages of interlanguage (Purdue, 1993), and b) of increasing the likelihood of attending to, noticing, and retaining for subsequent use (Schmidt, 2001), aspects of input presented to learners during task activities.

7) Task complexity affects uptake induced by feedback, and focus on form
In addition to development of form-function mappings, facilitated by using language to meet increasingly complex task demands, selective attention to purely formal, functionally redundant features of the L2 will additionally be necessary. Focus on form (FonF), i.e., selective attention to such forms in communicative context (Doughty & Williams, 1998; Long, 1991; Long & Robinson, 1998; Muranoi, 2000), will be necessary, and this will be most effective in facilitating noticing of input made salient on complex tasks, since these require greater mental and communicative effort, depth of processing, and so greater attentional and memory resource allocation to input, than simpler tasks.
        A further justification for this claim is the fact is that complex oral interactive tasks simply lead to greater quantities of interaction and modified repetitions. Only one study has shown this directly, (Robinson, 2001a) but that finding is also broadly compatible with Allwood’s observation (in Purdue, 1993, pp. 136-141) that the proportion of on task feedback-containing-utterances (FBUs) in the ESF project, and also feedback words (FBWs) decreases over time as learners increase in proficiency. At any one point in time, therefore, more complex tasks making greater demands on proficiency should elicit more of such feedback relative to simpler versions, and such feedback provides an interactive context (e.g., through use of clarification requests, confirmation checks, and responses to them) for reactive focus on form techniques such as recasting.

8) Simple to complex task sequencing leads to efficient scheduling and automatization of task components
Finally, sequencing tasks from simple to complex creates the optimal conditions for practice (Robinson, in preparation a, b) leading to gains in automaticity, since it facilitates the executive processes of scheduling, and coordinating the component demands of complex tasks (see Jonides, 1995; Sanders, 1998; Sarno & Wickens, 1995). In this view, simple tasks can be seen as ‘scaled worlds’ ‘which preserve certain functional relationships of a complex task environment while paring away others’ (Ehret, Gray & Kirschenbaum, 2000).’
(from 'The Cognition Hypothesis of adult task-based L2 development’. (2003) Second Language Studies, 21,(1):45-107.)