ABSTRACT
The written corrective feedback (WCF) strand of research has been gaining momentum as recent studies seek not only to address the potential effects of type of feedback but also how second language (L2) writers process the type of feedback they receive on their compositions. Although previous studies have employed written languaging (e.g., Manchón & Roca de Larios, 2011; Suzuki, 2012, 2017) as one measure to gather concurrent data, this study sought to address directly how learners process WCF during the revision stage of a composition. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three WCF types (direct, indirect, metalinguistic) or the control condition. They wrote a composition (Draft 1) and revised it twice, first with the respective WCF (Draft 2) and then without (Draft 3). Think-aloud (TA) protocols were used to capture participants’ processing. Results revealed high, medium, and low levels of processing in the direct and metalinguistic WCF groups, whereas the indirect WCF participants processed at low and medium levels. Type of WCF had no differential effect on accuracy scores over time.
