Tridimensional attitude model (cognitive-affective-conative) combined with an adapted error treatment model for analyzing OCF attitudes¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · 7 claims (7 for) · 1 study (1 qualitative), q2 · 0 of 1 report an effect size · 7 claims rest on one study

Description¶

The study applies Schiffman and Kanuk's (2004) attitude model, in Jain's (2014) tridimensional version, in which attitudes comprise cognitive (beliefs), affective (feelings), and conative (behavior) components whose combinations yield eight possible "triodes". The authors pair this with an adaptation of Lyster and Ranta's (1997) error treatment model, adding OCF timing, provider, and effectiveness, so that error types, strategies, provider, timing, effectiveness, and learner reactions serve as objects of attitude. An attitude is defined as "a relatively enduring organization of beliefs, feelings, and behavioral tendencies towards socially significant objects, groups, events or symbols".

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Interview or verbalized attitude data that can be coded into cognitive, affective, and conative components

Constraints¶

• The authors note attitudes toward some objects (e.g., error types, effectiveness) could not be fully described because participants lacked awareness or verbalized dispositions

Target Learners¶

• College-level EFL instructors

Target Learning Objectives¶

• Teachers' professional knowledge and attitudes regarding oral corrective feedback in language teaching

Claims¶

• College EFL instructors in a Mexican case study showed more positive attitudes towards implicit oral corrective feedback strategies (recast, body language) than explicit ones [+W]
• Instructors focused OCF on pronunciation and grammar errors and withheld correction unless errors impeded communication [+W]
• Teachers' attitudes towards oral corrective feedback are guided mainly by considerations of students' feelings, which override cognitive and other components [+W]
• The teacher was the principal provider of oral corrective feedback, with peer and self-correction rarely proactively promoted [+W]
• Teachers adjusted their OCF provision in response to learner reactions, providing feedback when accepted and stopping when it was challenged or ignored [+W]
• Instructors favored delayed over immediate oral corrective feedback, believing immediate correction intimidates students [+W]
• EFL instructors were unaware of most OCF strategy types and did not consider students' cognition when deciding on corrective feedback [+W]

Related Theories¶

Examples¶

• Provide theory-based and evidence-based training on oral corrective feedback for EFL teachers

Key Sources¶

• Gómez Argüelles, L., Hernández Méndez, E., & Perales Escudero, M. D. (2019). EFL Teachers' Attitudes Towards Oral Corrective Feedback: A Case Study. Profile: Issues in Teachers' Professional Development, 21(1), 107-120. https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v21n1.69508