|
Comparing the Effect of Simple, Complex, and Very Complex Tasks on Listening Comprehension
|
Malak Ziba Mehrinejad *   , Mohammad Khatib |
| Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch |
|
|
Abstract: (805 Views) |
The main focus of this research was on comparing the effect of simple, complex, and very complex tasks on listening comprehension. To the best of researchers’ knowledge, the concurrent investigation of the effect of variables ± spatial reasoning and ± single task on listening comprehension has not been the main focus of relevant studies. However, a wealth of studies has examined the effect of some cognitive complexity variables on second language learners’ performance. The extent to which high-proficiency students comprehended simple, complex, and very complex tasks was compared by employing a within-subjects design. The purpose of employing this research’s second design, between-subjects design, was making a comparison between high-proficiency and low-proficiency students’ comprehension of simple, complex, and very complex tasks. High- and low-proficiency students were selected out of female students at an art non-profit university in Tehran by administrating the Oxford Placement Test to them. Thirty-one high- and low-proficiency students received simple non-spatial reasoning and single tasks, complex non-spatial reasoning and dual tasks, and very complex spatial reasoning and dual tasks in order. The extent of high-proficiency students’ comprehension of simple, complex, and very complex tasks was statistically different based on the results of Friedman test. The Mann-Whitney U test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, post hoc Bonferroni test, and repeated-measures ANOVA results indicated a statistically significant association between students’ language proficiency and how they accomplished listening tasks with cognitive complexity diversity. Second language teachers and instructional task constructors can employ this study’s findings to arrange and construct tasks for instructing L2.
The main focus of this research was on comparing the effect of simple, complex, and very complex tasks on listening comprehension. To the best of researchers’ knowledge, the concurrent investigation of the effect of variables ± spatial reasoning and ± single task on listening comprehension has not been the main focus of relevant studies. However, a wealth of studies has examined the effect of some cognitive complexity variables on second language learners’ performance. The extent to which high-proficiency students comprehended simple, complex, and very complex tasks was compared by employing a within-subjects design. The purpose of employing this research’s second design, between-subjects design, was making a comparison between high-proficiency and low-proficiency students’ comprehension of simple, complex, and very complex tasks. High- and low-proficiency students were selected out of female students at an art non-profit university in Tehran by administrating the Oxford Placement Test to them. Thirty-one high- and low-proficiency students received simple non-spatial reasoning and single tasks, complex non-spatial reasoning and dual tasks, and very complex spatial reasoning and dual tasks in order. The extent of high-proficiency students’ comprehension of simple, complex, and very complex tasks was statistically different based on the results of Friedman test. The Mann-Whitney U test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, post hoc Bonferroni test, and repeated-measures ANOVA results indicated a statistically significant association between students’ language proficiency and how they accomplished listening tasks with cognitive complexity diversity. Second language teachers and instructional task constructors can employ this study’s findings to arrange and construct tasks for instructing L2.
|
|
| Keywords: Cognitive Complexity, Dual Task, Listening Comprehension, Spatial Reasoning Demand, SSARC Model |
|
|
|
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2025/02/22 | Accepted: 2025/07/31 | Published: 2024/03/29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Send email to the article author |
|
|
|
| Add your comments about this article |
|
|
|
Publisher
