Reading input flooding versus listening input flooding: Can they boost speaking skill?

Open access


The present study compared the effects of reading input flooding and listening input flooding techniques on the accuracy and complexity of Iranian EFL learners’ speaking skill. Participants were 66 homogeneous intermediate EFL learners who were randomly divided into three groups of 22: Reading input flooding group, listening input flooding group, and control group. The reading flooded input group was exposed to the numerous examples of the target structures through reading. In the same phase, the listening group was given relatively the same task, through listening. The participants’ monologues in the posttest were separately recorded, and later transcribed and coded in terms of accuracy and complexity through Bygate’s (2001) standard coding system. The results of ANCOVA indicated the outperformance of reading input flooding group. The study also supported the trade-off effects (Skehan, 1998, 2009) between accuracy and complexity.

Alanen, R. (1995). Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language acquisition (pp. 259-302). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii.

Best, J., & Kahn, J.V. (2006). Research in education (tenth ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Bowden, C., Latham King, C. & Hudson, J. (2008). American English files. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bygate, M. (1999). Task as context for the framing, reframing, and unframing of language. System, 27, 33-48. DOI:

Bygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.). Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning and testing (pp. 37-53). London: Longman.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nded.). New York, NY: Longman.

Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nded.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

D’Ely, R. (2006). A focus on learners’ metacognitive process: The importance of the strategic planning, repetition, strategic planning plus repetition and strategic planning for repetition on L2 oral performance (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Santa Catarina University, Brazil.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Evelyn, S., & Marije, M. (2014). An exploratory study into trade-off effects on complexity, accuracy, and fluency on young learners’ oral task repetition. TESL Canada Journal, 30(4), 23-48.

Ferrari, S. (2012).A longitudinal study of complexity, accuracy, and fluency variation in second language development. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimension ofL2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in SLA (pp. 227-297). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Francis, S. (2003). Input flooding and the acquisition of the Spanish verbs ser and estar for beginning level adult learners (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana.

Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Hernandez, T.A. (2008). The effect of explicit instruction and input flood on students’ use of discourse markers on a simulated oral proficiency interview. Hispania, 91, 665-75.

Izumi, S. (2002). Output, and input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis: An experimental study of ESL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24,541-577. DOI:

Jourdenais, R., Ota, M., Stauffer, S., Boyson, B., & Daughty, C.J. (1995). Does textual enhancement promote noticing? In R. Schmidt (Ed.). Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp, 183-216). Honolulu, Hawai'i: University of Hawai'i Press.

Kim, Y., & Tracy-Ventura, N. (2013). The role of task repetition in L2 performance development: What needs to be repeated during task-based instruction? System, 44(3), 829-840. DOI:

Krashen, S. (1994).The pleasure hypothesis. In J. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University Roundtable on Language and Linguistics (pp. 299-322). Washington: Georgetown University Press.

Lee, S.K. (2007). Effects of textual enhancement and topic formality on Korean EFL students’ reading comprehension and learning of passive form. Language Learning, 57, 87-118. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00400.x

Lee, J.F. (2002). The incidental acquisition of Spanish future morphology through reading in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(1), 55- 80.

Leow, R.P., Egi, T., Nuevo, A.M., &Tsai, Y.-C. (2003).The roles of textual enhancement and type of linguistic item in adult L2 learners’ comprehension and intake. Applied Language Learning, 13, 1-16.

Overstreet, M. (1998). Textual enhancement and content familiarity: The focus of learner attention. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 2, 229-259.

Radwan, A. (2005). The effectiveness of explicit attention to form in language learning. System, 33, 69-87. DOI:

Rashtchi, M., & Gharanli, L. (2010). Noticing through input enhancement: Does it affect learning of the conditionals? Journal of Language and Translation, 1(1), 19-27.

Reinders, H., & Ellis, R. (2009). The effects of two types of input to intake and the acquisition of implicit and explicit knowledge. In R. Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Phlip, & H. Reinders (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp.281-302). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Rikhtegar, O., &Gholami, J. (2015). The effect of pre-verses post-presentation input flooding via reading on the young EFL learners’ acquisition of simple past tense. English Language Teaching, 8(3), 80-88. DOI:10.5539/elt.v8n3p80

Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.

Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in structured SLA: Theoretical Bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 154-179.

Shook, D.J. (1999). What foreign language recalls reveal about the input-to-intake phenomenon? Applied Language Learning, 10, 39-76.

Simard, D. (2009). Differential effects of textual enhancement formats on intake. System, 37(1), 124-135.

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied linguistics, 30(4), 510-532. DOI:

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183-207). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Spada, N. (1997). Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition: Review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 30, 73-87. DOI:

Tabatabaei, O.,& Yakhabi, M. (2009). The effect of comprehensible input and comprehensible output on the accuracy and complexity of Iranian EFL learner’s oral speech. The Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2, 218-248.

Trahey, M., & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and preemption in the second language classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 181-204. DOI:

VanPatten, B., Williams, J., & Rott, S. (2004). Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten, J. Williams, S. Rott, & M. Overstreet (Eds.), Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition (pp. 1-26). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Vercelloti, M. (2012). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency as properties of language performance: The development of the multiple subsystems over time and in relation to each other. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh, NY.

Wagner-Gough, J., & Hatch, E. (1975). The importance of input in second language acquisition studies. Language Learning 25 (2), 297-308. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1975.tb00248.x

White, P. (2015). The effects of input-based instructions on the acquisition of Spanish accusative clitics. Hispania, 98(2), 264-284.

Wong, W. (2003). Textual enhancement and simplified input: Effects on L2 comprehension and acquisition of non-meaningful grammatical form. Applied Language Learning, 13(2), 109-132.

Wong, W. (2005). Input enhancement: From theory and research to the classroom. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Journal Information


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 306 304 17
PDF Downloads 167 167 9