Type of task

The following analysis discusses the results obtained for the second variable being investigated, the type of task, with the aim of addressing the second research question proposed in this study: the extent to which this variable influences the learners’ use of CSs. As in the previous chapter, results will be quantitatively and qualitatively analysed considering first the totals obtained for this variable, and then following with a more detailed examination of findings.

In order to analyse these task effects on the use of the different CSs, the demands that each activity imposed will be first presented considering all their requirements for the participants of this study. This overview of the different task demands will serve as a baseline to use on the subsequent examination of the data.

Closed task: Jigsaw activity General requirements:

For this task, two jigsaw activities were used. As part of the instructions for this task, the learners were told that the activity consisted of one story divided in two parts; each half of the story was given to each participant by means of pictures which depicted each one’s part of the story. Thus, in order for them to complete the task, they had to describe their sets of pictures to each other and try to narrate the events in the possible order of the sequence, so that together both speakers could find out the sequence of the whole story they both shared. This also implied that they needed to ask each other questions so as to try to figure out together the sequence of the story. A time limit of 10 minutes was given to perform the task, and although there was no requirement for them to complete it, they were asked to try their best to accomplish the final aim of the task.

Linguistic demands:

These were imposed through the visual support given by the pictures which each learner had to use to perform the task. This meant that each subject was constrained to use the specific language for the entities and events depicted in these pictures in order to narrate their own part of the story, and so be able to carry out the task.

Cognitive demands:

These were reduced by the context already given to the learners, through the pictures provided, as they helped them to know what kind of information they needed to convey in order to perform the activity. These demands, on the other hand, may have been increased by the task familiarity factor (Skehan, 1998), that is to say, whether or not the participants were

familiar with this type of activity, an aspect which may have influenced their L2 performance. Thus, in order to minimise the possible effects of task unfamiliarity, on those occasions where some speakers were not acquainted with this type of activity, they were given another, simpler one to practice with for a few minutes before carrying out the data- elicitation task.

Demands of the situational context (Poulisse & Schils, 1989; Lujan-Ortega, 1997):

These were imposed by the time allotted for each task, since the participants were told that the activity could not last more than 10 minutes; after this, the task had to be stopped as I wished for roughly the same amount of data from each dyad. However, they were not obliged to complete the task during the time provided.

Communicative demands:

These were reduced by the task requirements, together with the pictures provided to each speaker, since the visual support shared by the participants aided the listener to better comprehend the speaker’s message, and help them in their attempts to convey that information.

Open task

General requirements:

This task consisted of a free-conversation activity with the following topics: ‘talk about someone who has influenced you the most’, ‘talk about your best holidays ever’, ‘talk about situations that cause you stress and how you cope with them’. The participants were instructed to speak freely about the topic given and to try to interact as much as possible, asking questions when necessary.

Linguistic demands:

These were reduced through topic familiarity, since the topics provided prompted the speakers to talk about themselves and so to use the language more freely. In this respect, there was no language constraint as in the jigsaw activity.

Cognitive demands:

These were posed by the absence of visual support, and thus of a given context for the learners to rely on, which increased the ‘cognitive complexity’11 of the task by means of the

11

This construct is subdivided into ‘cognitive familiarity’ (background knowledge) and ‘cognitive processing’ (processing of the information).

134

‘cognitive processing’12 (Skehan 1998) involved. The processing of this type of information, which might have not necessarily been part of their previous knowledge, increased the task difficulty in that the learners were obliged to process, activate and produce information related to a given topic, all at the same time and without previous preparation.

Demands of the situational context:

As in the realisation of the closed task, the learners were instructed about the time limits of this free conversation activity. However, in this case the learners were less pressured since there was not a final aim to accomplish, but simply to talk to each other about the topic provided.

Communicative demands:

These were imposed by the lack of visual aids, which made the communication between the speakers more difficult as they did not share the information to be conveyed. This, therefore, may have decreased the listener’s understanding of the speaker’s message, and so the help provided to the speaker to get their message across.