An eye-tracking investigation of visual search strategies and test performance of L1 and L2 listening test takers

IF 3.1 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning Pub Date : 2022-10-06 DOI:10.58459/rptel.2023.18009
Vahid Aryadoust, Stacy Foo
{"title":"An eye-tracking investigation of visual search strategies and test performance of L1 and L2 listening test takers","authors":"Vahid Aryadoust, Stacy Foo","doi":"10.58459/rptel.2023.18009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Through the use of eye-tracking technology and a while-listening performance (WLP) test, this study examined the differences in gaze behaviors and measured listening performances on test items (across various stages of the test) and compared them between native English-speaking (E-L1) and non-native English-speaking (E-L2) candidates. One hundred students from a public university in Singapore participated in the study. A series of Mann-Whitney U tests indicated that E-L1 candidates outperformed E-L2 candidates in the test with higher test scores. Using stringent data processing cutoffs (presence≥80% gaze data) and a series of non-parametric multivariate analyses, the study further found that the dynamicity of gaze behaviors on the test items across various stages of the test was similar between E-L1 and E-L2 candidates. However, there were distinctive differences in gaze behaviors between the two groups. For E-L1 candidates, none of the gaze behaviors on the test items across the different stages of the test predicted their overall listening test scores. In contrast, the overall listening test scores for E-L2 candidates was predicted by the average proportion of time that they had dwelled on the test items while simultaneously answering them and listening to the auditory text. The study is the first to show that keyword matching on the test items during the while-listening stage significantly contributes to WLP test performance for E-L2 candidates. These results suggest that the focal construct of the listening test is confounded by group-specific reading behaviors on the test items. In line with previous research, the use of the WLP test format for assessing second language listening comprehension is not recommended.","PeriodicalId":37055,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"1 1","pages":"9"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58459/rptel.2023.18009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Through the use of eye-tracking technology and a while-listening performance (WLP) test, this study examined the differences in gaze behaviors and measured listening performances on test items (across various stages of the test) and compared them between native English-speaking (E-L1) and non-native English-speaking (E-L2) candidates. One hundred students from a public university in Singapore participated in the study. A series of Mann-Whitney U tests indicated that E-L1 candidates outperformed E-L2 candidates in the test with higher test scores. Using stringent data processing cutoffs (presence≥80% gaze data) and a series of non-parametric multivariate analyses, the study further found that the dynamicity of gaze behaviors on the test items across various stages of the test was similar between E-L1 and E-L2 candidates. However, there were distinctive differences in gaze behaviors between the two groups. For E-L1 candidates, none of the gaze behaviors on the test items across the different stages of the test predicted their overall listening test scores. In contrast, the overall listening test scores for E-L2 candidates was predicted by the average proportion of time that they had dwelled on the test items while simultaneously answering them and listening to the auditory text. The study is the first to show that keyword matching on the test items during the while-listening stage significantly contributes to WLP test performance for E-L2 candidates. These results suggest that the focal construct of the listening test is confounded by group-specific reading behaviors on the test items. In line with previous research, the use of the WLP test format for assessing second language listening comprehension is not recommended.
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
一、二语听力考生视觉搜索策略与考试成绩的眼动追踪研究
本研究通过眼动追踪技术和边听表现(WLP)测试,考察了英语母语(E-L1)和非英语母语(E-L2)考生在不同测试阶段的注视行为和听力表现的差异,并对其进行了比较。来自新加坡一所公立大学的100名学生参与了这项研究。一系列的Mann-Whitney U测试表明,E-L1考生在测试中表现优于E-L2考生,测试成绩更高。通过严格的数据处理截止点(注视数据≥80%)和一系列非参数多变量分析,研究进一步发现,E-L1和E-L2考生在测试的各个阶段对测试项目的注视行为的动态相似。然而,两组人的凝视行为存在显著差异。对于E-L1考生来说,在不同的测试阶段,对测试项目的注视行为都不能预测他们的整体听力测试成绩。相比之下,E-L2考生的整体听力测试成绩是通过他们在回答和听听觉文本的同时思考测试项目的平均时间比例来预测的。本研究首次发现,边听阶段的关键词匹配对英语二语考生的语言能力测试成绩有显著影响。这些结果表明,听力测试的焦点结构被测试项目上的群体特定阅读行为所混淆。与先前的研究一致,不建议使用WLP测试格式来评估第二语言听力理解。
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
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
3.10%
发文量
28
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
An investigation of students and teachers’ new media literacy: the contributing characteristics with the moderator role of gender Classroom implementation of an auxiliary problem presentation system for mechanics adapted to learners’ errors Correlation among game addiction, achievement emotion, and learning motivation: A study of Indonesian youth in the context of e-learning system The influence of gender on STEM career choice: A partial least squares analysis “I felt like I was on campus” creating a situated learning environment through Instagram
×
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