Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T03:30:39.965Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Replication research in the domain of perceived L2 fluency: Approximate and close replications of Kormos and Dénes (2004) and Rossiter (2009)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2024

Viktoria Magne Open the ORCID record for Viktoria Magne [Opens in a new window]
Viktoria Magne*
Affiliation:
University of West London, London, UK
*
Email: viktoria.magne@uwl.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The primary objective of this paper is to contribute to the advancement of second language (L2) fluency research by outlining a specific proposal for future replication studies. The overarching goal is to assess the generalisability of the original findings of the two influential studies in the area of perceived fluency: Kormos and Dénes (2004) and Rossiter (2009). This objective will be achieved by first introducing the concept of L2 fluency that often conflates two categories: (1) overall language proficiency; (2) temporal features of speech production. The paper then highlights limitations in the current fluency research paradigm emphasising the variability in the methods employed for speech analysis and rating data collection. This diversity makes it somewhat challenging to compare results across various studies. In response to these challenges, the second part of the paper proposes several close and approximate replications of the two studies.

Type
Replication Research
Information
Language Teaching , First View , pp. 1 - 9
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Atagi, E., & Bent, T. (2016). Auditory free classification of native and nonnative speech by nonnative listeners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(2), 241–263. doi:10.1017/S014271641400054XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosker, H. R., Pinget, A.-F., Quené, H., Sanders, T., & de Jong, N. H. (2013). What makes speech sound fluent? The contributions of pauses, speed and repairs. Language Testing, 30(2), 159–175. doi:10.1177/0265532212455394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Boves, L. (2002). Quantitative assessment of second language learners’ fluency: Comparisons between read and spontaneous speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 111(6), 2862–2873. doi:10.1121/1.1471894CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Jong, N. (2018). Fluency in second language testing: Insights from different disciplines. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(3), 237–254. doi:10.1080/15434303.2018.1477780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2009). Putting accent in its place: Rethinking obstacles to communication. Language Teaching, 42(4), 476–490. doi:10.1017/S026144480800551XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Rossiter, M. J., Munro, M. J., & Thomson, R. I. (2004). Second language fluency: Judgments on different tasks. Language Learning, 54(4), 655–679. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00282.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. doi:10.3758/BF03193146CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foster, P., Tonkyn, A., & Wigglesworth, G. (2000). Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 354–375. doi:10.1093/applin/21.3.354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gan, Q., & Ma, L. (2023). Examining the perceptions and self-reported practices of L2 teachers in China regarding oral fluency: A conceptual replication and extension. Language Teaching Research. doi:10.1177/13621688231186857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaacs, T., & Trofimovich, P. (2012). Deconstructing comprehensibility: Identifying the linguistic influences on listeners’ L2 comprehensibility ratings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(3), 475–505. doi:10.1017/S0272263112000150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kormos, J. (2006). Speech production and second language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. doi:10.4324/9780203763964Google Scholar
Kormos, J., & Dénes, M. (2004). Exploring measures and perceptions of fluency in the speech of second language learners. System, 32(2), 145–164. doi:10.1016/j.system.2004.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40(3), 387–417. doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00669.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magne, V., Suzukida, Y., Ilkan, M., Tran, M., Suzuki, S., & Saito, K. (2019). Exploring the dynamic nature of second language listeners’ perceived fluency: A mixed-methods approach. TESOL Quarterly, 53(4), 1139–1150. doi:10.1002/tesq.528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsden, E., Morgan-Short, K., Thompson, S., & Abugaber, D. (2018). Replication in second language research: Narrative and systematic reviews and recommendations for the field. Language Learning, 68(2), 321–391. doi:10.1111/lang.12286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, K. (2023). How and why to conduct a replication study. In Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (Eds.), Current approaches in second language acquisition research: A practical guide (pp. 334–351). Wiley. doi:10.31219/osf.io/x3e4uCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pennycook, A. (2017). The cultural politics of English as an international language. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porte, G., & McManus, K. (2019). Doing replication research in applied linguistics. Routledge.Google Scholar
Porte, G., & Richards, K. (2012). Focus article: Replication in second language writing research. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3), 284–293. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2012.05.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prefontaine, Y., Kormos, J., & Johnson, D. E. (2016). How do utterance measures predict raters’ perceptions of fluency in French as a second language? Language Testing, 33(1), 53–73. doi:10.1177/0265532215579530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riggenbach, H. (1991). Toward an understanding of fluency: A microanalysis of nonnative speaker conversations. Discourse Processes, 14(4), 423–441. doi:10.1080/01638539109544795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossiter, M. J. (2009). Perceptions of L2 fluency by native and non-native speakers of English. Canadian Modern Language Review, 65(3), 395–412. doi:10.3138/cmlr.65.3.395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., Ilkan, M., Magne, V., Tran, M., & Suzuki, S. (2018). Acoustic characteristics and learner profiles of low, mid and high-level second language fluency. Applied Psycholinguistics, 39(3), 593–617. doi:10.1017/S0142716417000571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., & Shintani, N. (2016). Do native speakers of North American and Singapore English differentially perceive second language comprehensibility? TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 421–446. doi:10.1002/tesq.234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., Trofimovich, P., & Isaacs, T. (2016). Second language speech production: Investigating linguistic correlates of comprehensibility and accentedness for learners at different ability levels. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(2), 217–240. doi:10.1017/s0142716414000502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sato, M. (2020). Learner attitudes and attention to form in peer interaction: A proposal to replicate Adams et al. (2011) and Philp et al. (2010). Language Teaching, 55(3), 407–416. doi:10.1017/S0261444820000610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N. (2016). Second language fluency and its underlying cognitive and social determinants. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54(2), 79–95. doi:10.1515/iral-2016-9991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Language Teaching, 36(1), 1–14. doi:10.1017/S026144480200188XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. A., Flower, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 6(4), 346–347. doi:10.1080/14780880903340091Google Scholar
Suzuki, S., & Kormos, J. (2020). Linguistic dimensions of comprehensibility and perceived fluency: An investigation of complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language argumentative speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(1), 143–167. doi:10.1017/S0272263119000421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, S., & Kormos, J. (2023). The multidimensionality of second language oral fluency: Interfacing cognitive fluency and utterance fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 45(1), 38–64. doi:10.1017/S0272263121000899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, S., Kormos, J., & Uchihara, T. (2021). The relationship between utterance and perceived fluency: A meta-analysis of correlational studies. Modern Language Journal, 105(2), 435–463. doi:10.1111/modl.12706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tavakoli, P., Campbell, C., & McCormack, J. (2016). Development of speech fluency over a short period of time: Effects of pedagogic intervention. TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 447–471. doi:10.1002/tesq.244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tavakoli, P., & Hunter, A.-M. (2018). Is fluency being ‘neglected’ in the classroom? Teacher understanding of fluency and related classroom practices. Language Teaching Research, 22(3), 330–349. doi:10.1177/1362168817708462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tavakoli, P., & Skehan, P.. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In Ellis, R. (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 239–273). John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi:10.1075/lllt.11.15tavCrossRefGoogle Scholar