Unprompted self-correction dominates negative feedback in NNS-NNS CMC interaction, interpreted as a face-saving preference¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Of 119 negative feedback occurrences, 112 were unprompted self-corrections, with only 1 explicit correction and 6 recasts; learners prefer self-initiated, self-completed repairs as less face-threatening. → Sarré 2011

Evidence¶

Sarré 2011¶

Sarré, C. (2011). Computer-mediated negotiated interactions: how is meaning negotiated in discussion boards, text chat and videoconferencing? In S. Thouësny & L. Bradley (Eds.), Second language teaching and learning with technology: views of emergent researchers (pp. 189-210). Dublin: Research-publishing.net. https://dx.doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2011.9781908416001

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Across all 12 groups, negative feedback totalled 119 occurrences: 112 self-corrections, 6 recasts, 1 explicit correction, and 0 questions and incorporations (Table 7). The authors interpret this via Schegloff, Jefferson and Sacks (1977): "learners thus prefer to use self-initiated, self-completed repairs because they are less face-threatening acts".

"Occurrences of negative feedback were more modest, as shown in Table 7, with the exception of unprompted self-corrections (SELCO)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Closed meaning-focused tasks foster more negotiation of meaning and negative feedback than open tasks in CMC — related
• Discussion board interactions generated no negative feedback at all, suggesting synchrony is required to foster corrective feedback — related, from the same study
• Completing meaning-focused tasks through CMC fosters negotiated interactions in all three modes (discussion board, text chat, videoconferencing) — related
• Learners prefer receiving corrective feedback more than teachers feel they should provide it — related