<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Isfahan</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Applied Research on English Language</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>3134-0644</Issn>
				<Volume>4</Volume>
				<Issue>2</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2015</Year>
					<Month>08</Month>
					<Day>01</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>The effects of task complexity on Chinese learners’ language production: A synthesis and meta-analysis</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle></VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>96</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>109</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">15505</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22108/are.2015.15505</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>EN</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Jiaxin</FirstName>
					<LastName>Xing</LastName>
<Affiliation>Beijing Normal University &amp; Lecturer, Qufu Normal University, China</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Shaoqian</FirstName>
					<LastName>Luo</LastName>
<Affiliation>Professor, Beijing Normal University, China</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2016</Year>
					<Month>06</Month>
					<Day>14</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>The  present  meta-analysis  was  conducted  to  provide  a  quantitative  measure  of  the &lt;br /&gt;overall effects of task complexity on Chinese EFL learners’ language  production.  Based  on  the &lt;br /&gt;strict inclusion criteria, 12 primary  studies  were synthesized according to key  features.  Eleven of &lt;br /&gt;them  were  meta-analyzed  to  investigate  effects  of  raising  the  resource-directing  task  complexity. &lt;br /&gt;Results revealed that (a) there was an assortment of treatments and measures, (b) there was a small &lt;br /&gt;to medium positive effect for syntactic complexity (d=0.64) and small effect for lexical complexity &lt;br /&gt;(d=0.20),  which  lends  support  to  the  Cognition  Hypothesis;  there  was  a  small  negative  effect  for &lt;br /&gt;accuracy (-0.18) and a close to negative effect (0.01) for fluency in writing, which partly confirms &lt;br /&gt;Skehan’s  Trade-off  effects,  and  (c)  task  modality  (oral  or  written)  did  not  make  a  significant &lt;br /&gt;difference on the overall effects on complexity and accuracy,  while  make a significant  difference &lt;br /&gt;on fluency.</Abstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Meta-Analysis</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Task Complexity</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">meta</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">analysis</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Complexity</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Accuracy</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Fluency</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://are.ui.ac.ir/article_15505_7526bf476824232fa20cfd8b77f73b3d.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
