How Do Listening Comprehension Processes Differ by Second Language Proficiency? Top-Down and Bottom-Up Perspectives

Q1 Arts and Humanities International Journal of Listening Pub Date : 2019-11-24 DOI:10.1080/10904018.2019.1694411
Aiko Furuya
{"title":"How Do Listening Comprehension Processes Differ by Second Language Proficiency? Top-Down and Bottom-Up Perspectives","authors":"Aiko Furuya","doi":"10.1080/10904018.2019.1694411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The present study aims to examine how listening comprehension processes (top-down and bottom-up) differ by second language proficiency. To investigate such differences, experiments (listening tasks) followed by questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were conducted. Participants included 18 lower intermediate learners, 19 upper intermediate learners, and 23 advanced learners. Participants listened to materials under two conditions: (a) vocabulary knowledge; no background knowledge and (b) no vocabulary knowledge; background knowledge. Results showed that lower intermediate learners comprehended better in (a), whereas upper intermediate learners performed better in (b). No significant difference was observed between (a) and (b) for advanced learners.","PeriodicalId":35114,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Listening","volume":"35 1","pages":"123 - 133"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10904018.2019.1694411","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Listening","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2019.1694411","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

ABSTRACT The present study aims to examine how listening comprehension processes (top-down and bottom-up) differ by second language proficiency. To investigate such differences, experiments (listening tasks) followed by questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were conducted. Participants included 18 lower intermediate learners, 19 upper intermediate learners, and 23 advanced learners. Participants listened to materials under two conditions: (a) vocabulary knowledge; no background knowledge and (b) no vocabulary knowledge; background knowledge. Results showed that lower intermediate learners comprehended better in (a), whereas upper intermediate learners performed better in (b). No significant difference was observed between (a) and (b) for advanced learners.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
第二语言水平对听力理解过程有何影响?自顶向下和自底向上的视角
摘要本研究旨在考察听力理解过程(自上而下和自下而上)如何因第二语言熟练程度而不同。为了调查这种差异,我们进行了实验(听力任务),然后进行了问卷调查和半结构化访谈。参与者包括18名初中学习者、19名高中学习者和23名高级学习者。参与者在两个条件下聆听材料:(a)词汇知识;没有背景知识和(b)没有词汇知识;背景知识。结果表明,初中生在(a)中理解得更好,而高中生在(b)中表现更好。高级学习者在(a)和(b)之间没有观察到显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Listening
International Journal of Listening Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN INNATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL TRAITS AND THE ATTITUDES` ASSESSMENT TOWARD ACTIVE LISTENING AMONG EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS LISTENING TO BOOKS’ DURING THE PANDEMIC: EXAMINING THE USES AND GRATIFICATIONS OF AUDIOBOOK LISTENING RHETORICAL LISTENING AS A PEDAGOGICAL TOOL IN HIGHER EDUCATION: EXPLORING THE BLACK PETE DEBATE IN FLANDERS RHETORICAL LISTENING AS A PEDAGOGICAL TOOL IN HIGHER EDUCATION: EXPLORING THE BLACK PETE DEBATE IN FLANDERS INVESTIGATING THE ROLE OF RESPONSE FORMAT IN COMPUTER-BASED LECTURE COMPREHENSION TASKS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1