Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

METHODOLOGICAL ADVANCES IN INVESTIGATING L2 WRITING PROCESSES: CHALLENGES AND PERSPECTIVES

  • David Galbraith (a1) and Ineke Vedder (a2)
  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      METHODOLOGICAL ADVANCES IN INVESTIGATING L2 WRITING PROCESSES
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      METHODOLOGICAL ADVANCES IN INVESTIGATING L2 WRITING PROCESSES
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      METHODOLOGICAL ADVANCES IN INVESTIGATING L2 WRITING PROCESSES
      Available formats
      ×

Abstract

  • An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided below. To view the full text please use the links above to select your preferred format.

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Ineke Vedder, Amsterdam Center for Language and Communication, University of Amsterdam, Spuistraat 134, 1012 VB Amsterdam. E-mail: i.vedder@uva.nl

References

Hide All
Baaijen, V. M., & Galbraith, D. (2018). Discovery through writing: Relationships with writing processes and text quality. Cognition and Instruction, 36, 199223. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2018.1456431.
Baaijen, V. M., Galbraith, D., & de Glopper, K. (2012). Keystroke analysis: Reflections on procedures and measures. Written Communication, 29, 246277. doi: 10.1177/0741088312451108.
Baaijen, V. M., Galbraith, D., & de Glopper, K. (2014). Effects of writing beliefs and planning on writing performance. Learning and Instruction, 33, 8191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.04.001.
Barkaoui, K. (2019). What can L2 writers’ pausing behavior tell us about their L2 writing processes? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 529–554.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1989). Intentional learning as a goal of instruction. In Resnick, L. B. (Eds.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 361392). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chanquoy, L., Foulin, J. N., & Fayol, M. (1996). Writing in adults: A real time approach. In Rijlaarsdam, G., van den Bergh, H., & Couzijn, M. (Eds.), Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp. 3643). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.
Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J. R. (2001). Fluency in writing: Generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18, 8098. doi:10.1177/0741088301018001004.
Chenu, F., Pellegrino, F., Jisa, H., & Fayol, M. (2014). Interword and intraword pause threshold in writing. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 17. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00182.
Chukharev-Hudilainen, E., Saricaoglu, A., Torrance, M., & Feng, H.-H. (2019). Combined deployable keystroke logging and eye-tracking for investigating L2 writing fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 583–604.
Davis, M. (2013). The development of source use by international postgraduate students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12, 125135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.11.008.
Flower, L. S., & Hayes, J. R. (1980). The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In Gregg, L. W. & Steinberg, E. R. (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 3150). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Galbraith, D., & Baaijen, V. M. (2018). The work of writing: Raiding the inarticulate. Educational Psychologist, 53, 238257. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1505515.
Galbraith, D., & Baaijen, V. M. (2019). Aligning keystroke with cognitive processes in writing. In Lindgren, E. & Sullivan, K. P. H. (Eds.), Observing writing: Insights from keystroke logging and handwriting (pp. 306325). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004392526_015.
Hayes, J. R. (2012a). Modeling and remodeling writing. Written Communication, 29, 369388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088312451260.
Hayes, J. R. (2012b). From idea to text. In Beard, R., Myhill, D., Riley, J., & Nystrand, M. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of writing development (pp. 6579). London, UK: Sage Publications Ltd.
Hayes, J. R., & Chenoweth, N. A. (2006). Is working memory involved in the transcribing and editing of texts? Written Communication, 23, 135149. doi:10.1177/0741088306286283.
Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In Gregg, L. W. & Steinberg, E. R. (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 330). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1986). Writing research and the writer. American Psychologist, 41, 11061113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.1106.
Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (Eds.) (2012). Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Kaufer, D. S., Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1986). Composing written sentences. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 121140.
Kellogg, R. T. (1988). Attentional overload and writing performance: Effects of rough draft and outline strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 355365. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.14.2.355.
Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In Levy, C. M. & Ransdell, S. E. (Eds.), The science of writing (pp. 5771). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kellogg, R. T., Whiteford, A. P., Turner, C. E., Cahill, M., & Mertens, A. (2013). Working memory in written composition: An evaluation of the 1996 model. Journal of Writing Research, 5, 159190. doi:10.17239/jowr-2013.05.02.1
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2017). Functional adequacy in L2 writing: Towards a new rating scale. Language Testing, 34, 321336. doi: 10.1177/0265532216663991.
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2018). Assessing functional adequacy of L2 performance in a task-based approach. In Taguchi, N. & Kim, Y. (Eds.), Task-based approaches to teaching and assessing pragmatics (pp. 266285). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Leijten, M., Van Waes, L., Schrijver, I., Bernolet, S., & Vangehuchten, L. (2019). Mapping master’s students’ use of external sources in source-based writing in L1 and L2. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 555–582.
Lindgren, E., & Sullivan, K. P. H. (2019). Observing writing: Insights from keystroke logging and handwriting. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill Publishing. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004392526.
López-Serrano, S., Roca de Larios, J., & Manchón, R. M. (2019). Language reflection fostered by individual L2 writing tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 503–527.
Matsuhashi, A. (1981). Pausing and planning: The tempo of written discourse production. Research in the Teaching of English, 15, 113134.
McGinley, W. (1992). The role of reading and writing while composing from sources. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 227248. doi: 10.2307/747793.
Medimorec, S., & Risko, E. F. (2017). Pauses in written composition: On the importance of where writers pause. Reading and Writing, 30, 12671285. doi: 10.1007/s11145-017-9723-7.
Olive, T. (2014). Toward a parallel and cascading model of the writing system: A review of research on writing processes coordination. Journal of Writing Research, 6, 141171. doi: 10.17239/jowr-2014.06.02.4.
Ortega, L. (2012). Interlanguage complexity: A construct in search of theoretical renewal. In Kortmann, B. & Szmrecsanyi, B. (Eds.), Linguistic complexity: Second language acquisition, indigenization, contact (pp. 127155). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
Phinney, M., & Khouri, S. (1993). Computers, revision and ESL writers: The role of experience. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2, 257277. doi: 10.1016/1060-3743(93)90021-t.
Révész, A., & Michel, M. (2019). Introduction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 491–501.
Révész, A., Kourtali, N. E., & Mazgutova, D. (2017). Effects of task complexity on L2 writing behaviors and linguistic complexity. Language Learning, 67, 208241. doi:10.1111/lang.12205.
Révész, A., Michel, M., & Lee, M. (2019). Exploring second language writers’ pausing and revision behaviors: A mixed-methods study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 605–631.
Roca de Larios, J., Nicolás-Conesa, F., & Coyle, Y. (2018). Focus on writers: Process and strategies. In Manchón, R. M., & Matsuda, P. K. (Eds.), Handbook of second and foreign language writing (pp. 267286). Boston, MA: Walter de Gruyter.
Schilperoord, J. (1996). The distribution of pause time in written text production. In Rijlaarsdam, G., van den Bergh, H., & Couzijn, M. (Eds.), Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp. 2135). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.
Segers, M. S. R. (2013). Understanding informal feedback in the workplace: The impact of the position in the organizational hierarchy. European Journal of Training and Development 37, 7285. doi.org/10.1108/03090591311293293.
Spelman Miller, K. (2000). Academic writers on-line: Investigating pausing in the production of text. Language Teaching Research, 4, 123148. doi: 10.1111/lang.12205.
White, M. J., & Bruning, R. (2005). Implicit writing beliefs and their relation to writing quality. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 166189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.07.002.

METHODOLOGICAL ADVANCES IN INVESTIGATING L2 WRITING PROCESSES: CHALLENGES AND PERSPECTIVES

  • David Galbraith (a1) and Ineke Vedder (a2)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed