Document Type : Research Paper


1 Associate Professor, University of Tehran

2 Assistant Professor in TEFL, University of Tehran

3 PhD Candidate, University of Tehran, Alborz Campus, Tehran, Iran


The importance of communicative ability in second language classroom context has increased the interest in interaction among foreign language learners. The quality of negotiations is influenced by so many factors that should be investigated in order to facilitate the process of second language acquisition. This study seeks to investigate the effect of task type on autonomous EFL learners’ interactive negotiation in synchronous computer-mediated communication context. Total number of 60 pre- intermediate EFL learners were chosen from Iran Language Institute of Birjand based on their performance on the language learning autonomy questionnaire designed by Zhang and Li (2004). They participated in three types of tasks, including Decision making, Jigsaw, and Opinion gap tasks via Telegram Desktop. The chat history of EFL learners was analyzed in terms of the model of interaction proposed by Tsui (1994). Three main moves of Initiating, Responding, and Follow-up were included in her taxonomy of interaction analysis.
The results suggested that the learners tried to utilize different frequencies of appropriate moves to achieve the goals of the specific task. Practically, this study presented a revised model that can be used as a frame work for designing suitable task types in the process of computer-mediated communication.


Bitchener, J. and Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. New York: Routledge 221
Canada, K., & Pringle, R. (1995). The role of gender in college classroom interactions Retrieved July 14, 2008, from genderincollege classroom.htm.
Chen, Y. H. (2005). Computer mediated communication: The use of CMC to develop EFL learners’ communicative competence. Asian EFL Journal, 7(1), 167-182.
Chu, H. (2004). A study of negotiation of meaning in synchronous computer-mediated communication between non-native speakers of Japanese and Korean. Proceedings of the 8th conference of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics 8, 64-75. (accessed 17/10/2012).
Corpuz, V. F. (2011). Error correction in second language writing: teachers' beliefs, practices and students' preferences. Unpublished Master's thesis. Queensland University of Technology.
Dickinson, L. and Carver, D. (1980) ‘Learning how to learn: Steps towards self-direction in foreign language learning’, ELT Journal, 35 (1): 1–7.
Drudy, S., & Chathain, M. (2002). Gender effects in classroom interaction: data collection, self-analysis and reflection. Retrieved November 13, 2007 from
Duffy, J., Warren, K., & Walsh, M. (2002). Classroom interactions: Gender of teacher, gender of student, and classroom subject. Retrieved September 12, 2007, from http://www.multilingual matters. net/erie/016/0034/erie0160034.pdf.
Fernández-García, M. & Martínez-Arbelaiz, A. (2002). Negotiation of meaning in nonnative speaker-nonnative speaker synchronous discussions. CALICO Journal, 19(2), 279-294.
Figura, K. & Jarvis, H. (2007). Computer-based materials: A study of learner autonomy and strategies. System, 35, 448-468.
Gass, S.M. (1997). Input, interaction and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence.
Gass, S.M., & Varonis, EM. (1985). Negotiation of meaning in non-native speaker conversation. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 149-161). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Guevara de León , G . (2010). Learner autonomy in language learning? Is that possible? MEMORIAS DEL VI FORO DE ESTUDIOS EN LENGUAS INTERNACIONAL .978-607-9015-22-0.  From Hearst, M. (2000). The debate on automated essay grading. Intelligence Systems, 15(5), 22-37
Jafari, S., & Kafipour, R. (2013). An Investigation of Vocabulary Learning Strategies by Iranian EFL Students in Different Proficiency Levels. 2(6).
Kung, S.-C. (2004). Synchronous electronic discussions in an EFL reading class. ELT Journal 58(2), 164-173.
Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy: Definitions, issues and problems. Authentik Language Learning Resources Limited.
Long, M. H. . (1980). Input, interaction, and second language acquisition. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, 1980. Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, 5082.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Richie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–478). San Diego: Academic Press.
Nakahama, Y., Tyler, A & van Lier, L .(2001). Negotiation of meaning in conversational information gap activities: A comparative discourse analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), 377-405.
Nike, N. (2010). Examining the language learning potential of a task-based approach to synchronous computer-mediated communication. Ph. D. dissertation, Victoria University of Wellington.
Pellettieri, J. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace: the role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In M. Warschauer and R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: concepts and practice (pp. 59-86). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pica, T. (1987). Second-language acquisition, social interaction, and the classroom. Applied Linguistics, 8, 3-21.
Pica, T., & Doughty, C. (1985). Input and interaction in the communicative language classroom: A comparison of teacher-fronted and group activities. In S. M. Gass, & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 115-132). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Pica, T., Kanagy, R., & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language research and instruction. In S. Gass & G. Crookes (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 9–34). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Rashidi, N. & Rafiee Rad, M. (2010). Analyzing patterns of classroom interaction in EFL classrooms in Iran. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 7(3), 93-120.
Razagifard, P. & Razzaghifard, V. (2011). Corrective feedback in a computer-mediated communicative context and the development of second language grammar. Teaching English with Technology, 11(2), 1-17.
Samaan, K. & Barnard, F. (2004). Task models and interaction models in a multiple user interface generation process. In proceedings of 3rd international workshop for user interface design, TAMODIA, Prague, Czeck Re public, 137-144.
Smith, B. (2003). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. Modern Language Journal, 87, 38–57.
Sinclair, J. and Coulthard, D. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse. London: Oxford University Press.
Sussex, R. (2012). Text, input and editing as a bottleneck in mobile devices for language learning. Computer-Enhanced and mobile-Assisted Language Learning: immerging issues and trends, Australia 
Tabatabaei, O., & Hoseini, H.-S. (2014). EFL and ESP Learners’ Use of Language Learning Strategies: A Study of Collocations. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5(1), 112-120.
Tsouroufli, M. (2002). Gender and teacher's classroom practice in secondary school in Greece. Gender and Education, 14, 135-147.
Varonis, E. & S. Gass. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model of the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6, 71-90.
Yilmaz, Y., & Granena, G. (2010). The effects of task type in Synchronous computer-mediated communication. ReCALL, 22, 20–38.
Zhang, L.X. & Li X.X. (2004). A comparative study on learner autonomy between Chinese students and west European students. Foreign Language World, 4, 15-23.
Ziglari, L. (2008). The role of interaction is L2 acquisition: An emergentist perspective. European Journal of Scientific Research, 23(3), 446-453.
Ziegler, N. (2016). Taking technology to task: Technology-mediated TBLT, performance, and production, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 136-163.