View in EDS

Engagement with written corrective feedback: Examination of feedback types and think-aloud protocol as pedagogical interventions.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Engagement with written corrective feedback: Examination of feedback types and think-aloud protocol as pedagogical interventions.
Authors: Tabari, Mahmoud Abdi1 (AUTHOR) mabditabari@unr.edu, Sato, Masatoshi2 (AUTHOR), Wang, Yizhou3 (AUTHOR)
Source: Language Teaching Research. Jul2026, Vol. 30 Issue 5, p2865-2898. 34p.
Subject Terms: *Revision (Writing process), *Protocol analysis (Cognition), *Second language acquisition, *Teaching methods, *English as a foreign language, Psychological techniques
Abstract: This study examined the combined effects of written corrective feedback (WCF) and think-aloud protocols (TAPs) as two types of pedagogical intervention for improving the revision quality of second language (L2) writing. With a quasi-experimental design, it explored whether TAPs trigger deeper processing of WCF under two WCF-type conditions: direct or indirect WCF. Participants were 80 high-intermediate learners of English as a second language (ESL) at a US university who were divided into (1) direct WCF+TAPs; (2) direct WCF-only; (3) indirect WCF+TAPs; and (4) indirect WCF-only. The impacts of the interventions were gauged by changes in seven subsystems of complexity–accuracy–lexis (CAL) between the first and final drafts of narrative essays. Results showed differential impacts of the four conditions depending on the linguistic dimensions, including some negative impacts of TAPs. Participants' comments during TAP sessions were used to triangulate the interventions' effects. We conclude that WCF and TAPs promoted different types of processing; while WCF contributed to the potential restructuring of learners' interlanguage systems, TAPs triggered learners' higher-order thinking and served as a self-reflection tool to make strategic decisions in revising the text. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Language Teaching Research is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
Description
Abstract:This study examined the combined effects of written corrective feedback (WCF) and think-aloud protocols (TAPs) as two types of pedagogical intervention for improving the revision quality of second language (L2) writing. With a quasi-experimental design, it explored whether TAPs trigger deeper processing of WCF under two WCF-type conditions: direct or indirect WCF. Participants were 80 high-intermediate learners of English as a second language (ESL) at a US university who were divided into (1) direct WCF+TAPs; (2) direct WCF-only; (3) indirect WCF+TAPs; and (4) indirect WCF-only. The impacts of the interventions were gauged by changes in seven subsystems of complexity–accuracy–lexis (CAL) between the first and final drafts of narrative essays. Results showed differential impacts of the four conditions depending on the linguistic dimensions, including some negative impacts of TAPs. Participants' comments during TAP sessions were used to triangulate the interventions' effects. We conclude that WCF and TAPs promoted different types of processing; while WCF contributed to the potential restructuring of learners' interlanguage systems, TAPs triggered learners' higher-order thinking and served as a self-reflection tool to make strategic decisions in revising the text. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:13621688
DOI:10.1177/13621688231202574