Cognitive Factors Influencing Error Patterns in Second

Language Acquisition
Adebayo Micheal

Abstract
Second Language Acquisition (SLA) is shaped by a complex interaction of cognitive
processes that influence how learners perceive, process, and produce the target language.
This study examines the cognitive factors underlying common error patterns among
second-language learners, emphasizing the roles of working memory capacity, attention
control, metalinguistic awareness, and information-processing strategies. It highlights how
limitations in working memory lead to grammatical and syntactic inaccuracies, while
variations in attentional resources affect learners’ ability to notice language forms and
monitor output. Additionally, the study explores how metalinguistic awareness supports error
correction and how transfer-based processing strategies contribute to predictable patterns of
lexical and structural errors. By integrating insights from cognitive psychology and SLA
research, this work offers a comprehensive understanding of how cognitive constraints and
abilities shape learners’ error patterns. The findings underscore the need for instructional
approaches that enhance cognitive engagement, promote noticing, and support strategic
processing to reduce persistent language errors and improve learning outcomes.

I. Introduction
Second Language Acquisition (SLA) is a multifaceted process in which learners gradually
develop competence in a language beyond their native tongue. Understanding how learners
acquire a second language is essential because it informs teaching practices, curriculum
design, and theories of linguistic development. A central concept in SLA research is the
analysis of “error patterns” systematic deviations in learner language that reveal underlying
cognitive and linguistic processes. These errors are not random; rather, they reflect internal
mechanisms that shape how learners process, store, and produce language.

Cognitive factors play a crucial role in shaping these error patterns. Elements such as
working memory, attention, processing constraints, prior knowledge structures, and retrieval
mechanisms directly influence learner performance. By examining these cognitive aspects,
researchers can better understand why certain errors persist, why some structures are more
difficult than others, and how learners’ mental processes interact with linguistic input.​
This study therefore aims to explore the major cognitive factors that contribute to error
patterns in SLA, clarify the mechanisms behind these influences, and identify implications for
teaching and future research.

II. Theoretical Background

Cognitive approaches to SLA emphasize the mental processes learners use to perceive,
interpret, and internalize language. Unlike purely linguistic theories, cognitive theories focus
on the learner’s mind as an active processor of information.

Among the key theoretical frameworks is Information Processing Theory, which compares
language learning to skill acquisition. Learners progress from controlled, effortful processing
to automatic, fluent performance through repeated practice. Connectionism adds to this
perspective by describing language learning as the gradual strengthening of neural
connections formed through exposure. Errors, in this view, occur when learners have
incomplete or weak associations.​
Another influential framework is Working Memory Theory, which highlights the role of
limited cognitive capacity in handling linguistic input. A learner’s ability to store and
manipulate information directly affects accuracy, sentence structure, and complexity.

These cognitive explanations differ from linguistic explanations, which attribute errors
primarily to incomplete grammar knowledge or developmental sequences. Cognitive theories
argue instead that many errors stem from processing limitations, attention failures, or
memory constraints rather than structural ignorance.

III. Cognitive Factors Influencing Error Patterns

A. Working Memory Capacity

Working memory is responsible for temporarily storing and processing information. In SLA,
learners rely on working memory to hold vocabulary, monitor grammar, and plan sentences.
Limited working memory capacity often results in:

1.​ Grammatical errors such as incorrect verb endings.

2.​ Omissions of function words when the cognitive load is high.
3.​ Structural simplifications, where learners reduce sentence complexity to manage
cognitive demands.​

Thus, the more demanding a linguistic task, the more likely learners are to produce errors
due to working memory overload.

B. Attention and Noticing

Schmidt’s Noticing Hypothesis proposes that learners must consciously notice linguistic
forms in order to acquire them. Because attention is selective and limited, not all aspects of
input receive equal focus.

When learners fail to notice form–meaning relationships—such as tense markers or plural

forms—errors emerge. Attention allocation also affects monitoring during production: if
attention shifts to meaning and message planning, form accuracy declines.
C. Processing Constraints

Language production involves multiple stages of processing, which can occur serially or in
parallel. Under conditions of time pressure or heavy cognitive load, learners experience:

1.​ Morpho-syntactic errors because they cannot fully process grammatical forms.
2.​ Fluency disruptions when automaticity is not yet developed.
3.​ Incorrect word order or agreement errors due to rapid serial processing demands.

The level of automaticity determines how easily learners can retrieve forms without taxing
cognitive resources. Less automatic forms result in slower, more error-prone output.

D. Prior Knowledge and L1 Transfer

Cognitive mechanisms underlying transfer involve retrieving familiar mental representations

from the first language (L1) when faced with unfamiliar L2 structures. This can lead to:

1.​ Positive transfer, where L1 and L2 share similar structures.

2.​ Negative transfer, producing errors due to structural differences.​

This cross-linguistic influence is not purely linguistic but cognitive: learners default to
entrenched mental schemas that guide interpretation and production.

E. Learning Strategies and Cognitive Styles

Learners differ in the strategies they employ to manage cognitive processes:

1.​ Metacognitive strategies such as planning, monitoring, and evaluating often

improve accuracy by enhancing attention to form.
2.​ Analytical learners may excel in grammar accuracy but struggle with natural
fluency.
3.​ Holistic learners may communicate fluently but produce more structural errors.​

Cognitive flexibility the ability to shift approaches helps learners recognize and correct
recurring errors by adapting strategies to new language demands.

F. Memory Retrieval and Access Fluency

Memory retrieval is essential for vocabulary use and grammar access. When retrieval is slow
or incomplete, learners exhibit:

1.​ Lexical errors, including substitutions and approximations.​

2.​ Use of high-frequency words, because these are more easily retrieved.​

3.​ Delayed responses, affecting overall fluency.​

Learners tend to rely on recently encountered or salient linguistic forms, which shapes the
types of errors they produce during spontaneous speech.

IV. Interactions Among Cognitive Factors

These cognitive factors do not operate independently. Working memory, attention, and
processing speed interact dynamically during language use. For example, limited working
memory reduces the ability to notice forms, while slow retrieval can increase cognitive load,
leading to reduced attention to accuracy.​
These combined pressures contribute to persistent and fossilized errors, especially when
learners repeatedly rely on the same processing shortcuts. Additionally, the linguistic
environment interacts with these cognitive constraints, either supporting or hindering
noticing, retrieval, and processing efficiency.

V. Implications for Teaching and Learning

Understanding how cognitive factors shape error patterns has major pedagogical
implications:

1.​ Reducing cognitive load through scaffolding, chunking, and simplified input can
improve accuracy.
2.​ Enhancing noticing through input enhancement, feedback, and
consciousness-raising tasks helps learners attend to target forms.
3.​ Supporting working memory with structured activities, repetition, and pattern drills
improves processing of complex structures.
4.​ Boosting retrieval fluency with spaced repetition, lexical access training, and
high-frequency practice increases accuracy.
5.​ Individualized instruction recognizes that learners have different cognitive styles,
processing speeds, and memory capacities, allowing teachers to tailor activities to
learner profiles.​

VI. Conclusion
Cognitive factors are central to understanding error patterns in Second Language
Acquisition. Working memory limitations, attentional constraints, processing demands,
L1-based mental representations, learning strategies, and retrieval mechanisms all shape
the type, frequency, and persistence of learner errors.​
Integrating cognitive insights into SLA research enriches our understanding of how learners
internalize language and why certain errors endure despite instruction. Future research
should examine how cognitive factors interact in real-time processing and how instructional
interventions can better support learners’ cognitive needs.

Reference
1.​ Hassan, M.K. and Rami, Z., 2024. Exploring nuances in second language acquisition:
an error analysis perspective. Migration Letters, 21(4), pp.294-298.
2.​ Rami, Zawad, GMABU TAHER, FATEMA SULTANA, and JAMIL HUSSAIN. "ANALYSIS
OF ERRORS IN PARTS OF SPEECH IN LEARNING ENGLISH AS A SECOND
LANGUAGE."
3.​ Rami, Z., 2024. An Evaluation of Examination System at Tertiary Level: An Empirical
Case Study in Bangladesh (Master's thesis, Aligarh Muslim University).
4.​ Rami, Z., Bhan, A., Vijoy, P., Bijale, M. and Sharma, V., Mapping Holistic Growth:
Developing a Comprehensive Student Development Scale.
5.​ Rami, Z., Hassan, M. K., & Shatnawi, H. (2023). Pedagogy of Communicative and
Technical English for Engineering Students at Tertiary Level: A Case Study in
Bangladesh. Migration Letters, 20(S8), 1557-1575.
6.​ Rami, Zawad. "The Role of Pronunciation in teaching of speaking Skills «." (2023).
7.​ Ahmed, Sheikh Saifullah, Rabeya Bossry, Deb Proshad Halder, Farhana Yeasmin,
Sheikh Md Rokonul Islam, and Zawad Rami. "Turning Leaves into Lessons: Integrating
Literature-Inspired Environmental Pedagogy in Language Classroom." Available at
SSRN 5034704.