YEAR

1967

REFERENCES
Reber, A. S. (1967). Implicit learning of
artificial grammars. Journal of Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behavior 6, 317-327.

1981

Sharwood Smith, M. (1981).

Consciousness-raising and the second
language learner. Applied Linguistics 2,
159-168.

ANNOTATION
Reber is widely referenced as being the first to use the term implicit learning, a process
defined as one during which participants acquire knowledge without intention and without
becoming aware of the acquired knowledge. Implicit learning contrasted with explicit
learning, a process of acquiring conscious knowledge. In his seminal study, the author
exposed participants to letter sequences (generated by an artificial finite-state grammar)
through a memorization procedure. Implicit learning was operationalized as participants
ability to verbalize underlying rules and measured non-concurrently/offline. He reported
participants ability to implicitly learn grammatical letter sequences better than randomized
sequences.

THEME
B, E

One early reference to consciousness in SLA was Smiths argument that implicit
knowledge had to be made explicit in order to the L2 learner to improve linguistic skills,
which he described as consciousness raising. The author refined this notion to what he
called input enhancement in his 1991 article, SHARWOOD SMITH, M. (1991). SPEAKING
TO MANY MINDS: ON THE RELEVANCE OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF LANGUAGE INFORMATION
FOR THE L2 LEARNER. SECOND LANGUAGE RESEARCH, VOL. 7 NO. 2. 118-132.

For distinct reviews of the input (textual enhancement) strand of research, see:
HAN, Z., PARK, E. S., & COMBS, C. (2008). TEXTUAL ENHANCEMENT OF INPUT: ISSUES
AND POSSIBILITIES. APPLIED LINGUISTICS 29, 597618.
LEOW, R. P. (2009). INPUT ENHANCEMENT AND L2 GRAMMATICAL DEVELOPMENT: WHAT
THE RESEARCH REVEALS. IN J. WATZINGER-THARP & S. L. KATZ, (EDS.),
CONCEPTIONS OF L2 GRAMMAR: THEORETICAL APPROACHES AND THEIR APPLICATION IN
THE L2 CLASSROOM. BOSTON, MA: HEINLE PUBLISHERS. 16-34.
1981

Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language

acquisition and second language learning.
Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Krashens Monitor Model was the first theoretical postulation in relation to the role of
consciousnesss in SLA. In his model, the author argued for a non-interface division between
the constructs of acquisition (an unconscious process that results in acquired/implicit
knowledge) and learning (a conscious process involving awareness that results in
learned/explicit knowledge). See opposing views such as a weak interface:
ELLIS, N. C. (2015). IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT LANGUAGE LEARNING: THEIR DYNAMIC
INTERFACE AND COMPLEXITY. IN P. REBUSCHAT (ED.), IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT LEARNING
OF LANGUAGES. AMSTERDAM, THE NETHERLANDS: BENJAMINS. 3-23.
ELLIS, R. (2006). MODELING LEARNING DIFFICULTY AND SECOND LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY:
THE DIFFERENTIAL CONTRIBUTIONS OF IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE. APPLIED
LINGUISTICS 27, 431-463.

or a strong interface:
DEKEYSER, R. (2007). SKILL ACQUISITION THEORY. IN B. VANPATTEN & J. WILLIAMS (EDS.),
THEORIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION. MAHWAH, NJ: ERLBAUM. 97-113. See
Dekeyser (2007) below.
See Hulstijn (2015) for a unique proposal to revisit the two-system view of a distinction
between implicit (acquired) versus explicit (learned) knowledge.
HULSTIJN, J. (2015). EXPLAINING PHENOMENA OF FIRST AND SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
WITH THE CONSTRUCTS OF IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT LEARNING: THE VIRTUES AND PITFALLS
OF A TWO-SYSTEM VIEW. IN P. REBUSCHAT (ED.), IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT LEARNING OF
LANGUAGES. AMSTERDAM, THE NETHERLANDS: BENJAMINS. 25-46.

Krashens postulations, together with REBERS (1967) definition of implicit learning and its
operationalization, provided the impetus for several strands of SLA research addressing
implicit learning and type of learning conditions (implicit, explicit, and incidental). See, for
example, ROBINSON (1995), WILLIAMS (2005), REBUSCHAT & WILLIAMS (2012) below.
1987

McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second

language learning. London: Edward
Arnold Ltd.

McLaughlin's Cognitive theory, derived from cognitive psychology, is arguably the first
theoretical attempt in SLA to posit a role for attention in the early stages of the L2 learning
process. Cognitive theory is generally based on the concepts of controlled and automatic
processes in which the allocation of attention and the notions of cognitive effort and
restructuring play key roles. Within the theory, language learning is viewed as the acquisition
of a complex cognitive skill and the notion of L2 learners as limited capacity processors of L2
information, especially at the early stages of the L2 learning process. Despite the role of
cognitive effort, the role of awareness during these early stages (controlled processes) was not
regarded as crucial for intake to occur.
See, for example, some empirical studies premised on the notion of limited cognitive capacity
in L2 learning, initiated in VANPATTEN, B. (1990). ATTENDING TO FORM AND CONTENT IN
THE INPUT: AN EXPERIMENT IN CONSCIOUSNESS. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
12, 287301.
GREENSLADE, T., L. BOUDEN & C. SANZ. (1999). ATTENDING TO FORM AND CONTENT IN
PROCESSING L2 READING TEXTS. SPANISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS 3, 6590.
HAN, Z.-H., & PEVERLY, S. (2007). INPUT PROCESSING: A STUDY OF AB INITIO LEARNERS
WITH MULTILINGUAL BACKGROUNDS. THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM
4, 1737.
LEOW, R. P. (1993). TO SIMPLIFY OR NOT TO SIMPLIFY: A LOOK AT INTAKE. STUDIES IN

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 15, 333355.

LEOW, R. P. (1995). MODALITY AND INTAKE IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION. STUDIES IN
SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 17, 7989.
LEOW, R. P., H-C. HSIEH & N. MORENO. (2008). FORM AND MEANING REVISITED. LANGUAGE
LEARNING 58, 665695.
MORGAN-SHORT, K., J. HEIL, A. BOTERO-MORIARTY & S . EBERT. (2012). ALLOCATION OF
ATTENTION TO SECOND LANGUAGE FORM AND MEANING: ISSUES OF THINK ALOUDS AND
DEPTH OF PROCESSING. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 34, 659-685.
SHOOK, D. J. (1994). FL/L2 READING, GRAMMATICAL INFORMATION, AND THE INPUT-TOINTAKE PHENOMENON. APPLIED LANGUAGE LEARNING 5, 57-93.
The author proposed replacing the term consciousness with awareness in SLA in
MCLAUGHLIN, B. (1990). "CONSCIOUS" VERSUS "UNCONSCIOUS" LEARNING. TESOL
QUARTERLY 24, 617-634.
1990

Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of

consciousness in second language learning.
Applied Linguistics 11, 129-158.

Schmidts seiminal article was the first in SLA to centralize both the roles of attention and
awareness in the early processing stage (input to intake) of learning an L2. Schmidt's
Noticing Hypothesis postulated that attention controls access to awareness and is responsible
for the subjective experience of noticing, which allows input to be converted to intake.
Learners cannot learn the grammatical features of a language without first "noticing" them.
Schmidt proposed three levels of awareness: perception, noticing, and understanding. The
Noticing Hypothesis became arguably the most influential theoretical underpinning of many
strands of SLA research premised on the role of attention and/or awareness in L2
development. Many studies have provided empirical feedback of the benefits of noticing in
L2 development.
For more on the concept of noticing, see also:
SCHMIDT, R. (1994). IMPLICIT LEARNING AND THE COGNITIVE UNCONSCIOUS: OF ARTIFICIAL
GRAMMARS AND SLA. IN N. ELLIS (ED), IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT LEARNING OF LANGUAGES.
LONDON: ACADEMIC PRESS, 165-209 where Schmidt watered down his original
postulation of noticing as the necessary and sufficient condition for the conversin of
input into intake to one that more noticing leads to more learning.
SCHMIDT, R. W. (ED.). (1995). ATTENTION AND AWARENESS IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING.
HONOLULU, HI: UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I, SECOND LANGUAGE TEACHING AND
CURRICULUM CENTER. Schmidts edited book, the first of its kind in SLA, specifically
addressed the role of attention and awareness in learning and the theoretical and practical

controversies that each construct has sparked. ALANENs chapter on input enhancement
(Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition) marks one
early attempt to include think aloud protocols to operationalize the concept of noticing
among other measures.
SCHMIDT, R. (2001). ATTENTION. IN P. ROBINSON (ED.), COGNITION AND SECOND LANGUAGE
INSTRUCTION. CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 3-32 in which Schmidt emphasized the
importance of attention in all aspects of SLA and that what is noticed or apperceived in
SLA is not the raw data of the input to which attention is directed but input as interpreted
by existing schemata, which themselves are implicit.
SCHMDT, R. (2010). ATTENTION, AWARENESS, AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN LANGUAGE
LEARNING. IN W. M. CHAN, S. CHI, K. N. CIN, J. ISTANTO, M. NAGAMI, W. SEW, T.
SUTHIWAN, & I. WALKER, PROCEEDINGS OF CLASIC 2010, SINGAPORE. SINGAPORE:
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE, CENTRE FOR LANGUAGE STUDIES. 721-737.
For critiques, see:
LEOW, R. P. (2013). SCHMIDTS NOTICING HYPOTHESIS: MORE THAN TWO DECADES AFTER. IN
J. M. BERGSLEITHNER, S. N. FROTA & J. K. YOSHIOKA (EDS.), NOTICING AND SECOND
LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: STUDIES IN HONOR IN RICHARD SCHMIDT. HONOLULU, HI:
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII, NATIONAL FOREIGN LANGUAGE RESOURCE CENTER. 23-35.
TRUSCOTT, J. (1998). NOTICING IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: A CRITICAL REVIEW.
SECOND LANGUAGE RESEARCH 14, 103-135.
TRUSCOTT, J., & M. A. SHARWOOD SMITH. (2011). INPUT, INTAKE, AND CONSCIOUSNESS: THE
QUEST FOR A THEORETICAL FOUNDATION. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 33,
497-528.
For empirical studies on noticing, see, for example,
IZUMI, S., M. BIGELOW, M. FUGIWARA & S. FEARNOW. (1999). TESTING THE OUTPUT
HYPOTHESIS: EFFECTS OF OUTPUT ON NOTICING AND SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION.
STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 21, 421-452.
LEOW, R. P. (2001). DO LEARNERS NOTICE ENHANCED FORMS WHILE INTERACTING WITH THE
L2?: AN ONLINE AND OFFLINE STUDY OF THE ROLE OF WRITTEN INPUT ENHANCEMENT IN
L2 READING. HISPANIA 84, 496-509.
QI, D. & S. LAPKIN. (2001). EXPLORING THE ROLE OF NOTICING IN A THREE-STAGE SECOND
LANGUAGE WRITING TASK. JOURNAL OF SECOND LANGUAGE WRITING 10, 277-303.

IZUMI, S., (2002). OUTPUT, INPUT ENHANCEMENT, AND THE NOTICING HYPOTHESIS: AN
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON ESL RELATIVIZATION. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION 24, 541-577.
GASS, S., I . SVETICS & S. LEMELIN. (2003) DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF ATTENTION.
LANGUAGE LEARNING 53, 497-545.
LEOW, R. P., T. EGI., A-M. NUEVO & Y. TSAI. (2003). THE ROLES OF TEXTUAL
ENHANCEMENT AND TYPE OF LINGUISTIC ITEM IN ADULT L2 LEARNERS COMPREHENSION
AND INTAKE. APPLIED LANGUAGE LEARNING 13, 93-108.
ADAMS, R. (2003). L2 OUTPUT, REFORMULATION, AND NOTICING: IMPLICATIONS FOR IL
DEVELOPMENT. LANGUAGE TEACHING RESEARCH 7, 347-376.
TAKAHASHI, S. (2005). PRAGMALINGUISTIC AWARENESS: IS IT RELATED TO MOTIVATION AND
PROFICIENCY? APPLIED LINGUISTICS 26, 90-120.
SACHS, R. & C. POLIO. (2007). LEARNERS USES OF TWO TYPES OF WRITTEN FEEDBACK ON A
L2 WRITING REVISION TASK. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 29, 67-100.
PARK, E. S. (2011). LEARNER-GENERATED NOTICING OF WRITTEN L2 INPUT: WHAT DO
LEARNERS NOTICE AND WHY. LANGUAGE LEARNING 61, 146-186.
UGGEN, M. S. (2012). REINVESTIGATING THE NOTICING FUNCTION OF OUTPUT. LANGUAGE
LEARNING 62, 506-540.
PARK, E. S. (2013). LEARNER-GENERATED NOTICING BEHAVIOR BY NOVICE LEARNERS:
TRACING THE EFFECTS OF LEARNERS L1 ON THEIR EMERGING L2. APPLIED LINGUISTICS
34, 74-98.
BERGSLEITHNER, J. M., S. M. FROTA & J. K. YOSHIOKA. (EDS.). (2013). NOTICING AND
SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: STUDIES IN HONOR OF RICHARD SCHMIDT. HONOLULU:
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII, NATIONAL FOREIGN LANGUAGE RESOURCE CENTER. This is a
collection of studies in honor of Richard Schmidt that covers different notions of noticing
(Alanen; Jacknick & Thornbury; Izumi; Leow; Loschky & Harrington; Skehan; Williams),
different measures of noticing (R. Ellis & Mifka-Profozic; Egi, Adams & Nuevo; Godroid
& Achmidtke; Simard & Foucambert; Spinner, Gass & Behney), experimental research
(Calderon; Cho & Reinders; Frota & Bergsleithner; Bergsleithner & Borges Mota;
Rebuschat et al.) and individual differences (Jackson)..
See also ROBINSON (1995), LEOW (1997), SMITH (2012), and GODFROID, A., & SCHMIDTKE,

J. (2013) below.
1994

Tomlin, R. S. & V. Villa. (1994). Attention

in cognitive science and second language
acquisition. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition 16, 183-203.

Tomlin and Villa proposed a model of input processing in SLA from a cognitive science
perspective. They offered a fine-grained analysis of attention that comprises the attentional
functions of alertness, orientation, and detection, defined as the cognitive registration of
stimuli. While detection is the level at which intake takes place and most related to awareness,
they claim that none of the three attentional functions may require awareness to operate.

LEOW (1998). TOWARD OPERATIONALIZING THE PROCESS OF ATTENTION IN SECOND

LANGUAGE ACQUSITION: EVIDENCE FOR TOMLIN AND VILLAS (1994) FINE-GRAINED ANALYSIS
OF ATTENTION. APPLIED PSYCHOLINGUISTICS 19, 133-159 was an empirical study in support of
TOMLIN AND VILLA'S (1994) model of attentional functions with regard to its fine-grained
analysis of attention.
SIMARD, D. & W. WONG (2001). ALERTNESS, ORIENTATION, AND DETECTION: THE
CONCEPTUALIZATION OF ATTENTIONAL FUNCTIONS IN SLA. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION 23, 103-124 critiqued both TOMLIN AND VILLA'S (1994) model and LEOW
(1998).
See LEOW, R. P. (2002). MODELS, ATTENTION, AND AWARENESS IN SLA: A RESPONSE TO
SIMARD AND WONGS (2001) ALERTNESS, ORIENTATION, AND DETECTION: THE
CONCEPTUALIZATION OF ATTENTIONAL FUNCTIONS. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION 24, 113-119 for a critique of SIMARD AND WONG (2001).
1994

1995

Ellis, N. C. (ed.). (1994). Implicit and

explicit learning of languages. London:
Academic Press.

Robinson, P. (1995a). Review article:

Attention, memory and the 'noticing'
hypothesis. Language Learning 45, 283331.

Ellis edited book was the first to address the roles of implicit learning, conscious hypothesis
testing, and explicit instruction in SLA, drawing upon evidence from field studies of
classroom SLA and laboratory experiments investigating the acquisition of artificial
grammars.
Robinson proposed a model of the relationship between attention and memory that is
complementary to Schmidt's Noticing Hypothesis. At the input-to-intake stage, Robinson
postulated two different kinds of processing strategies: data-driven (bottom-up) and
conceptually-driven (top-down), both of which require awareness. He also proposed that the
attentional demands of pedagogical tasks and individual differences in memory and
attentional capacity both affect the extent of noticing, thereby directly influencing SLA.
Crucially, he situated Tomlin and Villas (1994) detection before Schmidts (1990) noticing
along the learning process.
Robinson revised his model in ROBINSON, P. (2003). ATTENTION AND MEMORY DURING SLA.
IN C. DOUGHTY & M. H. LONG (EDS.), THE HANDBOOK OF SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION.
OXFORD: BLACKWELL. 631-678. In the new model, Robinson put forth a hierarchical

understanding of short-term and long-term memory together with the notion of the unlimited
capacity interference model from cognitive psychology.
1995

Robinson, P. (1995b). Aptitude, awareness

and the fundamental similarity of implicit
and explicit second language learning. In R.
Schmidt (ed.), Attention and awareness in
foreign language learning (Tech. Rep. No.
9). University of Hawaii at Manoa, Second
Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
303-359.

Robinson (1995) was one of the early studies to address empirically Schmidts Noticing
Hypothesis by investigating the claims of REBER (1967) and KRASHEN (1981) that
unconscious learning under implicit and incidental learning conditions is insensitive to
measures of individual differences (aptitude) when compared to learning under conscious-rule
search and instructed learning conditions. Awareness was operationalized retrospectively
(non-concurrent) as participants responses to questions on a questionnaire administered
offline after exposure. He reported positive benefits for a higher level of awareness
(understanding) on performance on a grammaticality judgment task.

B, E

Robinson later extended his investigation of type of learning conditions in, for example:
ROBINSON, P. (1996). LEARNING SIMPLE AND COMPLEX SECOND LANGUAGE RULES UNDER
IMPLICIT, INCIDENTAL, RULE SEARCH, AND INSTRUCTED CONDITIONS. STUDIES IN SECOND
LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 18, 2767;
ROBINSON, P. (1997A). INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND THE FUNDAMENTAL SIMILARITY OF
IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT ADULT SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING. LANGUAGE LEARNING 47,
4599.
ROBINSON, P. (1997B). GENERALIZABILITY AND AUTOMATICITY OF SECOND LANGUAGE
LEARNING UNDER IMPLICIT, INCIDENTAL, ENHANCED, AND INSTRUCTED CONDITIONS.
STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 19, 223-247.
See Rebuschat and Wiliams (2102) below for further studies conducted within an incidental
learning condition in relation to the construct awareness.
1997

Leow, R. P. (1997). Attention, awareness,

and foreign language behavior. Language
Learning, 47 467-506. [Updated in

Language Learning, 51, 113-155.]

Leow was one of the early studies to employ a concurrent procedure (online verbal reports) to
operationalize and measure the construct of awareness as a process in SLA. Assessment tasks
were a 4-option multiple-choice and a controlled written production task. Results revealed
three levels of awareness, positive effects of awareness on L2 development, and higher levels
of awareness correlating with higher levels of performances, findings replicated in several
subsequent studies.
Further extensions of Leows work can be found in:
LEOW, R. P. (1998). TOWARD OPERATIONALIZING THE PROCESS OF ATTENTION IN SECOND
LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: EVIDENCE FOR TOMLIN AND VILLA'S (1994) FINE-GRAINED
ANALYSIS OF ATTENTION. APPLIED PSYCHOLINGUISTICS 19, 133-159;

B/D

ROSA, E., & ONEILL, M. D. (1999). EXPLICITNESS, INTAKE, AND THE ISSUE OF AWARENESS.
STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 21, 511-556.
LEOW, R. P. (2000). A STUDY OF THE ROLE OF AWARENESS IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE BEHAVIOR:
AWARE VERSUS UNAWARE LEARNERS. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 22,
557-584
ROSA, E. M., & LEOW, R. P. (2004). AWARENESS, DIFFERENT LEARNING CONDITIONS, AND
SECOND LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT. APPLIED PSYCHOLINGUISTICS 25, 269-292.
SACHS, R., & SUH, B-R. (2007). TEXTUALLY ENHANCED RECASTS, LEARNER AWARENESS, AND
L2 OUTCOMES IN SYNCHRONOUS COMPUTER-MEDIATED INTERACTION, IN A. MACKEY
(ED.), CONVERSATIONAL INTERACTION IN SECOND- LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: A SERIES OF
EMPIRICAL STUDIES. OXFORD: OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS. 197-227.
MARTNEZ-FERNNDEZ, A. (2008). REVISITING THE INVOLVEMENT LOAD HYPOTHESIS:
AWARENESS, TYPE OF TASK, AND TYPE OF ITEM. IN M. BOWLES, R. FOOTE, S. PERPIN
& R. BHATT (EDS.), SELECTED PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2007 SECOND LANGUAGE RESEARCH
FORUM. SOMERVILLE, MA: CASCADILLA PROCEEDINGS PROJECT. 210-228.
CALDERON, A. (2013). THE EFFECTS OF L2 LEARNER PROFICIENCY ON DEPTH OF PROCESSING,
LEVELS OF AWARENESS, AND INTAKE. IN J. M. BERGSLEITHNER, S. M. FROTA & J. K.
YOSHIOKA. (EDS.), NOTICING AND SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: STUDIES IN HONOR OF
RICHARD SCHMIDT. HONOLULU: UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII, NATIONAL FOREIGN LANGUAGE
RESOURCE CENTER. 103-121.

DE LA FUENTE, M. J. (2015). EXPLICIT CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AND COMPUTER-BASED,

FORM-FOCUSED INSTRUCTION: THE ROLE OF L1 IN PROMOTING AWARENESS OF L2 FORMS.
IN R. P. LEOW, L. CEREZO & M. BARALT (EDS.), A PSYCHOLINGUISTIC APPROACH TO
TECHNOLOGY AND LANGUAGE LEARNING. BERLIN: DE GRUYTER MOUTON. 171-197.
HSIEH, H-C., N. MORENO & R. P. LEOW. (2015). AWARENESS, TYPE OF MEDIUM, AND L2
DEVELOPMENT: REVISITING HSIEH (2008). IN R. P. LEOW, L. CEREZO & M. BARALT
(EDS.), A PSYCHOLINGUISTIC APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY AND L2 LEARNING. BERLIN: DE
GRUYTER MOUTON. 131-150.
MEDINA, A. (2015). THE VARIABLE EFFECTS OF LEVEL OF AWARENESS AND CALL VERSUS
NON-CALL TEXTUAL MODIFICATION ON ADULT L2 READERS INPUT COMPREHENSION AND
LEARNING. IN R. P. LEOW, L. CEREZO & M. BARALT (EDS.), A PSYCHOLINGUISTIC
APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY AND L2 LEARNING. BERLIN: DE GRUYTER MOUTON. 109-130.
GURZYNSKI-WEISS, L., AL KHALIL, M., BARALT, M., & LEOW, R. P. (2015). LEVELS OF

AWARENESS IN RELATION TO TYPE OF RECAST AND TYPE OF LINGUISTIC ITEM IN

SYNCHRONOUS COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION: A CONCURRENT INVESTIGATION.
IN R. P. LEOW, L. CEREZO & M. BARALT (EDS.), A PSYCHOLINGUISTIC APPROACH TO
TECHNOLOGY AND L2 LEARNING. BERLIN: DE GRUYTER MOUTON. 151-170.

1998

Han, Y. & R. Ellis. (1998). Implicit

knowledge, explicit knowledge and general
language proficiency. Language Teaching
Research 2, 1-23.

Han and Ellis investigated ways of measuring implicit and explicit L2 knowledge,
specifically as such measures relate to measures of general language proficiency. The study
employed scores (knowledge of verb complementation in English) obtained from a timed oral
production test, a timed grammaticality judgment test, a delayed grammaticality judgment
test, and an interview designed to tap metalingual knowledge. A factor analysis revealed a
two-factor solution, which the authors took to represent a clear distinction between those
measures that incorporated a time constraint (hypothesized to reflect implicit knowledge) and
those that did not (hypothesized to tap explicit knowledge).

B/C/E

See ELLIS (2005) below for a follow-up of this study.

2000

Gass, S. M. & A. Mackey. (2000).

Stimulated recall methodology in second
language research. New York: Routledge.

Gass and Mackey offered an overview of the stimulated recall procedure, another
retrospective (non-concurrent) procedure employed in SLA to access participants reflections
on their cognitive or mental processes during an oral interaction (or task) in which they had
previously participated. If learners provided any mention of the targeted item or the
corrective nature of the feedback, it was assumed that this was evidence of perception and/or
noticing.
For studies that employed the SR methodology to address noticing or learner perception, see,
for example:
EGI, T. (2004). VERBAL REPORTS, NOTICING, AND SLA RESEARCH. LANGUAGE AWARENESS 13,
243-264.
MACKEY, A., GASS, S. M., & MCDONOUGH, K. (2000). HOW DO LEARNERS PERCEIVE
INTERACTIONAL FEEDBACK? STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 22, 471-497.
MACKEY, A., PHILP, J., EGI, T., FUJII, A., & TATSUMI, Y. (2002). INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN
WORKING MEMORY, NOTICING OF INTERACTIONAL FEEDBACK, AND L2 DEVELOPMENT. IN
P. ROBINSON (ED.), INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND INSTRUCTED LANGUAGE LEARNING.
AMSTERDAM: JOHN BENJAMINS. 181-210.
MACKEY, A., M. AL-KHALIL, G. ATANASSOVA, H. HAMA, A. LOGAN-TERRY & K.
NAKATSUKASA. (2007). TEACHERS INTENTIONS AND LEARNERS PERCEPTION ABOUT
CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN THE L2 CLASSROOM. INNOVATION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND
TEACHING, 1, 129-152.

EGI, T. (2010). UPTAKE, MODIFIED OUTPUT, AND LEARNER PERCEPTIONS OF RECASTS:

LEARNER RESPONSES AS LANGUAGE AWARENESS. THE MODERN LANGUAGE JOURNAL 94, 121.
KARTCHAVA, E. & A. AMMAR. (2014). LEARNERS BELIEFS AS MEDIATORS OF WHAT IS
NOTICED AND LEARNED IN THE LANGUAGE CLASSROOM. TESOL QUARTERLY 48, 86-109.
GURZYNSKI-WEISS, L., & BARALT, M. (2014). EXPLORING LEARNER PERCEPTION AND USE OF
TASK-BASED INTERACTIONAL FEEDBACK IN FTF AND CMC MODES. STUDIES IN SECOND
LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 36, 1-37.

UGGEN, M. S. (2012). REINVESTIGATING THE NOTICING FUNCTION OF OUTPUT. LANGUAGE

LEARNING 62, 506-540.
2000

Leow, R. P. (2000). A study of the role of

awareness in foreign language behavior:
Aware versus unaware learners. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition 22, 557-584.

Leow's study was an extension of LEOW (1997) and the first empirical effort to operationalize
and measure the construct of unawareness as a process via concurrent verbal reports. While
no dissociation between awareness and further processing of target forms was found in this
study, aware learners performed significantly better than unaware learners. Only item
learning (old exemplars) was investigated.

B/D

2004

Truscott, J. & M. A. Sharwood Smith.

(2004). Acquisition by processing: A
modular approach to language development.
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7, 120.

Truscott and Sharwood proposed their modular framework called Modular Online Growth
and Use of Language (MOGUL), which is an interdisciplinary, processing-oriented
framework of L2 development. Learners were said to become aware of mental
representations, of which there are two types: perceptual and affective. These representations
were identified to have especially high activation levels, which is the key to awareness. In
their updated model (TRUSCOTT & SHARWOOD SMITH. (2011). INPUT, INTAKE, AND
CONSCIOUSNESS: THE QUEST FOR A THEORETICAL FOUNDATION. STUDIES IN SECOND
LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 33: 497528), the authors proposed the following hypothesis to
account for awareness in SLA:
(1) The Activation Hypothesis: A representation is conscious if and only if its current
activation level is above a given threshold value.

2005

Hulstijn, J. H. & R. Ellis (eds.) (2005).

Theoretical and empirical issues in the
study of implicit and explicit second
language learning. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition 27, (2).

This seminal issue consisted of a brief general introduction (Hulstijn), five experimental
studies (R. Ellis; de Jong; Robinson; Tokowicz & MacWhinney; Williams), and a review
article on the implicit-explicit interface (N. C. Ellis).

2005

Williams, J. N. (2005). Learning without

awareness. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition 27, 269-304.

Williams is a methodological improvement of Experiment 2 in WILLIAMS, J. N. (2004).

IMPLICIT LEARNING OF FORM-MEANING CONNECTIONS. IN B. VANPATTEN, J. WILLIAMS, S.
ROTT, & M. OVERSTREET (EDS.), FORM MEANING CONNECTIONS IN SECOND LANGUAGE

B/E

ACQUISITION.

MAHWAH, NJ: ERLBAUM. 203-218. The 2004 study employed both old and new
exemplars of a semi-artificial language to address the role of awareness, operationalized and
measured as a product via offline verbal reports requesting the underlying rule of the target
embedded features. Assessment task was a two-option multiple-choice task and the analysis
was chance performance. Results indicated that participants did not perform above chance on
new items. In the improved 2005 study, using the same non-concurrent methodology, the
author did report evidence of implicit learning of the embedded features.
Further replications and an extension of the Williams (2005) study that both support and
refute the original findings include:
FARETTA-STUTENBERG, M., & MORGAN-SHORT, K. (2011). LEARNING WITHOUT AWARENESS
RECONSIDERED: A REPLICATION OF WILLIAMS (2005). IN G. GRANENA, J. KOETH, S. LEEELLIS, A. LUKYANCHENKO, G. PRIETO BOTANA & E. RHOADES (EDS.), SELECTED
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2010 SECOND LANGUAGE RESEARCH FORUM: RECONSIDERING SLA
RESEARCH, DIMENSIONS, AND DIRECTIONS. SOMERVILLE, MA: CASCADILLA. 18-28.
HAMA, M. & R. P. LEOW. (2010). LEARNING WITHOUT AWARENESS REVISITED: EXTENDING
WILLIAMS (2005). STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION, 32, 465-491. This is an
extension.
LEUNG, J. H. C. & J. N. WILLIAMS. (2011). THE IMPLICIT LEARNING OF MAPPINGS BETWEEN
FORMS AND CONTEXTUALLY DERIVED MEANINGS. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION 33, 33-55.
LEOW, R. P. M. HAMA. (2013). IMPLICIT LEARNING IN SLA AND THE ISSUE OF INTERNAL
VALIDITY: A RESPONSE TO LEUNG AND WILLIAMS' THE IMPLICIT LEARNING OF MAPPINGS
BETWEEN FORMS AND CONTEXTUALLY DERIVED MEANINGS. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION, 35, 545-557.
This article provided a detailed critique of LEUNG & WILLIAMS' (2011) research design
(modeled on the WILLIAMS (2005) design) that included the level of the studys internal
validity due to (a) the offline operationalization and measurement of the construct of
unawareness, (b) the provision of implicit feedback during the treatment phase, and (c) the
exposure to ten or less of the training items during the post-exposure phase.
LEUNG, J. H. C. J. N. WILLIAMS. (2012). CONSTRAINTS ON IMPLICIT LEARNING OF
GRAMMATICAL FORM-MEANING CONNECTIONS. LANGUAGE LEARNING 62, 634-662.
LI, F., X. GUO, L. ZHU, Z. YANG & Z. DIENES. (2013). IMPLICIT LEARNING OF MAPPINGS
BETWEEN FORMS AND METAPHORICAL MEANINGS. CONSCIOUSNESS AND COGNITION 22,
174-183.

CHAN, R.K. &J. H. LEUNG. (2014). IMPLICIT LEARNING OF L2 WORD STRESS REGULARITIES.
SECOND LANGUAGE RESEARCH 30, 463-484.
PACLOREK, A. & J. N. WILLIAMS. (2015) IMPLICIT LEARNING OF SEMANTIC PREFERENCES OF
VERBS. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 37, 359-382.
See also REBUSCHAT, P., P. HAMRICK, R. SACHS, K. RIESTENBERG & N. ZIEGLER. (2015)
below for triangulation of procedures to measure awareness both as a process and a
product.
ROBINSON, P. (2010). IMPLICIT ARTIFICIAL GRAMMAR AND INCIDENTAL NATURAL SECOND
LANGUAGE LEARNING: HOW COMPARABLE ARE THEY? LANGUAGE LEARNING 60, 245-264
questions the use of artificial language data in SLA.
2005

Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and

explicit knowledge of a second language: A
psychometric study. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition 27, 141-172.

Ellis, building on HAN AND ELLIS (1998) tackled the lack of valid measures of implicit and
explicit knowledge in L2 learning by attempting to establish operational definitions of the two
constructs and test them through a psychometric study of a battery of tests to independently
measure them. The tests examined 17 English structures, and they included an oral imitation
test with grammatical and ungrammatical sentences; an oral narration test; a timed
grammaticality judgment test (GJT); and untimed GJT with the same content; and a
metalinguistic knowledge test. A principal component factor analysis was shown to produce
two clear factors that were interpreted as corresponding to implicit and explicit knowledge.

B/E

Further work on measuring the constructs of implicit and explicit knowledge can be found in:
BOWLES, M. (2011). MEASURING IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT LINGUISTIC KNOWLEDGE: WHAT
CAN HERITAGE LANGUAGE LEARNERS CONTRIBUTE? STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION 33, 247-271.
ELLIS, R., S. LOEWEN, C. EDLER, R. ERLAM, J. PHILP & H. REINDERS (EDS.) (2009).
IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE IN SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING, TESTING, AND
TEACHING. BRISTOL: MULTILINGUAL MATTERS.
GUTIRREZ, X. (2012). IMPLICIT KNOWLEDGE, EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE, AND ACHIEVEMENT IN
SECOND LANGUAGE (L2) SPANISH. THE CANADIAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED LINGUISTICS 40,
20-41.
ZHANG, R. (2015). MEASURING UNIVERSITY-LEVEL L2 LEARNERS IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT
LINGUISTIC KNOWLEDGE, STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 37, 457-486.
2007

DeKeyser, R. (2007). Skill acquisition

theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams

DeKeyser adopted the strong interface position that neatly falls within cognitive psychology
models of skill acquisition and theories of controlled and automatic processing, best

(eds.), Theories in second language

acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum. 97-113.

represented by Andersons Adaptive Control of Thought (ACT) model (updated in

ANDERSON, J, R., D. BOTHELL, M. D. BYRNE, S. DOUGLASS, C. LEBIERE & Y. QIN. (2004).
AN INTEGRATED THEORY OF THE MIND. PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW 111, 1036-1060). Learning
is viewed as the gradual transformation of controlled performance to automatic performance,
which is achieved via much practice. This process, called proceduralization or automaticity, is
seen in the conversin of explicit (declarative) knowledge to implicit (procedural) knowledge.
For classic examples of empirical studies situated within the skill acquisition theory, see:
DEKEYSER, R. (1997). BEYOND EXPLICT RULE LEARNING: AUTOMATIZING SECOND LANGUAGE
MORPHOSYNTAX. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 19, 195-221.
ROBINSON, P. (1997). GENERALIZABILITY AND AUTOMATICITY OF SECOND LANGUAGE
LEARNING UNDER IMPLICIT, INCIDENTAL, ENHANCED, AND INSTRUCTED CONDITIONS.
STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 19, 223-247.

2011

Sanz, C. & R. P. Leow (eds) (2011).

Implicit and explicit conditions, processes
and knowledge in SLA and bilingualism.
Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University
Press.

Sanz and Leows edited book covered quite a range of topics addressing implicit and explicit
learning processes, conditions, and knowledge in SLA and bilingualism. With regard to
awareness, see N.C ELLISs chapter for the interface issue, LEOW, JOHNSON, & ZRATESNDEZS (see below) for methodological issues, and two empirical studies on explicit L2
knowledge (Linck & Weiss) and implicit learning of L2 phonemic contrasts (Eckman et al.).

2011

Leow, R.P., E. Johnson & G. Zrate-Sndez.

(2011). Getting a grip on the slippery
concept of awareness: Toward a finergrained methodological perspective. In C.
Sanz & R. P. Leow (eds.), Implicit and
explicit conditions, processes and
knowledge in SLA and bilingualism.
Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University
Press.

Leow, Johnson, and Zrate-Sndezs chapter focused on the methodological issues

surrounding the investigation of the relationship between the role of awareness, or lack
thereof, and learning in both SLA and non-SLA fields. The article presented a fine-grained
methodological perspective of awareness research that includes the what (is being learned),
the where (awareness is being investigated, concurrently or non-concurrently), and the how
(experimental task, type, and location of measurement are employed to investigate
awareness). They recommended that the construct of awareness should be investigated along
the acquisitional stages (construction/online vs. reconstruction/offline).

2012

Rebuschat, P. & J. N. Williams. (2012).

Implicit and explicit knowledge in second
language acquisition. Applied
Psycholinguistics 33, 829856.
rebuschat

Rebuschat & Williams reported the results of two experiments that investigated whether L2
implicit knowledge can occur in an incidental learning condition. Adult learners were trained
on semi-artifical language and tested by means of grammaticality judgments, subjective
measures of awareness (confidence levels and source attributions derived from cognitive
psychology, see REBUSCHAT, 2013 below), and offline verbal reports. Results indicated that
incidental exposure to L2 syntax can result in unconscious knowledge, which the authors took
to suggest that at least some of the learning in the experiment was implicit. This study
measured awareness as a product (type of knowledge) within an incidental learning condition.

B/E

Further work can be found in:

HAMRICK, P. & REBUSCHAT, P. (2012). HOW IMPLICIT IS STATISTICAL LEARNING? IN P.
REBUSCHAT & J. N. WILLIAMS (EDS.), STATISTICAL LEARNING AND LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION. BERLIN: DE GRUYTER MOUTON. 365-382.
REBUSCHAT, P., P. HAMRICK, R. SACHS, K. RIESTENBERG & N. ZIEGLER. (2013). IMPLICIT
AND EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE OF FORM-MEANING CONNECTIONS: EVIDENCE FROM
SUBJECTIVE MEASURES OF AWARENESS. IN J. BERGSLEITHNER, S. FROTA & J. K.
YOSHIOKA (EDS.), NOTICING: L2 STUDIES AND ESSAYS IN HONOR OF DICK SCHMIDT.
HONOLULU, HI: UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I AT MANOA, NATIONAL FOREIGN LANGUAGE
RESOURCE CENTER. 249-270.
HAMRICK, P. & P. REBUSCHAT. (2014). FREQUENCY EFFECTS, LEARNING CONDITIONS, AND
THE DEVELOPMENT OF IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT LEXICAL KNOWLEDGE. IN J. CONNORLINTON & L. AMOROSO (EDS.) MEASURED LANGUAGE: QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES TO
ACQUISITION, ASSESSMENT, PROCESSING, AND VARIATION. WASHINGTON, D.C.:
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY PRESS. 125-139.
GREY, S., J. N. WILLIAMS & P. REBUSCHAT. (2014). INCIDENTAL EXPOSURE AND L3
LEARNING OF MORPHOSYNTAX. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 36, 611-645.
REBUSCHAT, P., P. HAMRICK, R. SACHS, K. RIESTENBERG & N. ZIEGLER. (2015).
TRIANGULATING MEASURES OF AWARENESS: A CONTRIBUTION TO THE DEBATE ON
LEARNING WITHOUT AWARENESS. STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 37, 299334.
This study is noted for its attempt to triangulate measures of awareness from both a process
and product perspective by employing both concurrent (think aloud protocols) and nonconcurrent (confidence ratings and source attributions) measures of awareness.
ROGERS, J., A. RSVSZ & P. REBUSCHAT. (IN PRESS). IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE
OF INFLECTIONAL MORPHOLOGY. APPLIED PSYCHOLINGUISTICS.
2012

Smith, B. (2012). Eye-tracking as a measure

of noticing: A study of explicit recasts in
SCMC. Language Learning and
Technology 16, 53-81.

One of the first of several recent studies to utilize eye-tracking technology to assess noticing
in SLA, Smiths study investigated whether such technology could be employed as a measure
of noticing corrective feedback in the form of explicit recasts provided during NS-NNS taskbased synchronous computer-mediated communication (SCMC). Participant eye gaze during
a chat interaction task with explicit recasts was compared to eye gaze during a stimulated
recall. Smith reported that the results confirmed the validity of use of such technology.

B/D

2013

Rebuschat, P. (2013). Measuring implicit

Rebuschat reviewed three types of measures widely used in psychological research to assess

2013

and explicit knowledge in second language

research. Language Learning 63, 595-626.

the conscious or unconscious status of linguistic knowledge: retrospective verbal reports,

direct and indirect tests, and subjective measures (confidence levels and source attributions).
His goal was to present the measures to the SLA field to encourage their usage in the study of
implicit L2 learning. The article provides thorough descriptions of representative studies for
each measure, discussions of eachs limitations, as well as how best to apply each measure for
L2 research.

Godfroid, A., & J. Schmidtke. (2013). What

do eye movements tell us about awareness?
A triangulation of eye-movement data,
verbal reports, and vocabulary learning
scores. In J. M. Bergsleithner, S. N. Frota,
& J. K. Yoshioka (eds.), Noticing and
second language acquisition: Studies in
honor of Richard Schmidt. Honolulu:
University of Hawaii, National Foreign
Language Resource Center. 183-205.

Godfroid & Schmidtke made further use of eye-tracking technology to investigate Schmidts
Noticing Hypothesis and the conscious registration of linguistic surface elements. The study
triangulated measures of attention and awareness in the form of eye-movement recordings and
offline verbal reports, respectively, in order to elucidate the differential contributions of the
two mechanisms to receptive vocabulary learning. In interpreting their findings, Godfroid and
Schmidtke distinguished lower-level noetic awareness from higher-level autonoetic awareness
and confirmed the distinct contributions of each type through regression analysis.

B/D

See also:
GODFROID , A. & P. WINKE. (2015). INVESTIGATING IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT PROCESSING
USING L2 LEARNERS EYE-MOVEMENT DATA. IN P. REBUSCHAT (ED.), IMPLICIT AND
EXPLICIT LEARNING OF LANGUAGES. AMSTERDAM, THE NETHERLANDS : BENJAMINS. 325348.

2014

Leow, R. P., S. Grey, S. Marijuan & C.

Moorman. (2014). Concurrent data
elicitation procedures, processes, and the
early stages of L2 learning: A critical
overview. Second Language Research 30,
111-127.

Leow et al. provided a critical review of three concurrent data elicitation procedues
commonly used in SLA research to probe cognitive processes employed by L2 learners in the
early stages of the learning process: Think aloud (TA) protocols, eye-tracking (ET), and
reaction time (RT). Each procedures strengths and limitations were discussed and suggestions
were provided to maximize their usage, especially through triangulation.

2015

Andringa, S. & P. Rebuschat. (2015). New

directions in the study of implicit and
explicit learning. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition 37 (2).

This volume probed deeper into recent developments in research on L2 learning both as a
process and as a product in relation to a redefinition of what comprises implicit and explicit
learning with more focus on the concept of statistical learning (Andringa & Rebuschats
introduction; Caldwell-Harris et al.), the role of awareness (Paciorek & Williams; Rebuschat,
Hamrick, Sachs, Riestenberg, & Ziegler), measurement (Godfroid for eye-tracking; MorganShort et al. for functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI); Rebuschat, Hamrick, Sachs,
Riestenberg, & Ziegler for addressing both process and product), the implicit-explicit
interface (Andringa & Curcic; Cintrn-Valentn & Ellis), and individual differences
(Caldwell-Harris et al.; Morgan-Short et al.).

2015

Leow, R. P. (2015a) Explicit learning in the

L2 Classroom: A student-centered
approach. New York: Routledge.

This book focused on the issue of explicit learning in the L2 classroom from a studentcentered perspective. It reported on the theoretical underpinnings, empirical studies, and
research designs employed in SLA research to investigate the constructs of attention and

awareness in L2 learning. In his model of the L2 learning process in Instructed SLA, Leow
(2015) posited that the role of awareness at different stages of the L2 learning process may be
dependent upon the role played by depth of processing.
2015

Rebuschat, P. (ed.) (2015b) Implicit and

explicit learning of languages. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins.

Following up on REBERS (1967) coined term of implicit learning, Rebuschat edited a book
that covers, across a range of research fields, theoretical perspectives, methodology, and
practical applications of the unconscious cognitive process as a fundamental piece of human
cognition. Divided into three parts, the book provided ten chapters that offer a range of
theoretical perspectives on issues related to the study of implicit and explicit learning (N.
Ellis; Hulstijn; Leow, see below; Paciorek & Williams; VanPatten & Rothman; RoehrBrackin; Perruchet & Poulin-Charronnat; Weiss, Poepsel, & Gerfen; Wail & Conway; Onnis
et al.), five chapers on methodology (Ziori & Pothos; Rogers, Rvsz, & Rebuschat; Sanz &
Grey; Godfroid & Winke; Morgan-Short et al.), and three chapters on practical applications in
Instructed SLA (Kachinske et al.; R. Ellis; Goo et al.).

2015

Leow, R. (2015b). Implicit learning in SLA:

Of processes and products. In P. Rebuschat
(ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of
languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
47-67.

Leow addressed the role of learning without awareness in SLA by first disambiguating the
different perspectives of unawareness and learning based on their operationalizations and
measurements, addressing several methodological issues derived from the research designs of
studies purporting to investigate the role of awareness or lack thereof in language learning,
and proposing a list of criteria to be considered in studies investigating implicit learning in
SLA in order to raise the level of internal validity of studies. He strongly recommended
addressing the role of awareness within a theoretical framework in SLA in which learning can
be viewed as both a process and a product dependent upon the stage of operationalization and
measurement of this construct along the L2 learning process.