<?xml version="1.1" encoding="utf-8"?>
<article xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.1/xsd/JATS-journalpublishing1-mathml3.xsd" dtd-version="1.1" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JCER</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Journal of Contemporary Educational Research</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn>2208-8466</issn><eissn>2208-8474</eissn><publisher><publisher-name>Bio-Byword Scientific Publishing Pty. Ltd.</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.26689/jcer.v5i8.2438</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title>Influence of Working Memory Capacity on the Frequency of Self-Repairs</title><url>https://artdesignp.com/journal/JCER/5/8/10.26689/jcer.v5i8.2438</url><author>GaoLilei</author><pub-date pub-type="publication-year"><year>2021</year></pub-date><volume>5</volume><issue>8</issue><history><date date-type="pub"><published-time>2021-08-30</published-time></date></history><abstract>This article explored the influence of working memory capacity on the frequency of self-repairs. The narrative task and listening span task were used. Twenty post-graduate students participated in this study. Overall, the results of this study illustrated that the working memory is a factor of self-repairs. Speakers who have higher working memory capacity produce lesser self-repairs. This finding provides teachers with a new insight into second language teaching; that is, teachers can improve the amount of lexical knowledge when teaching students who have lower working memory in order to help them produce more accurate language during the process of L2 speech production.</abstract><keywords/></article-meta></front><body/><back><ref-list><ref id="B1" content-type="article"><label>1</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>Van Hest E, 1996, Self-Repair in L1 and L2 Production, Tilburg University Press, Tilburg. https://www.millisecond.com/download/library/listeningspan/</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref><ref id="B2" content-type="article"><label>2</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>O’Connor N, 1988, Repairs as Indicative of Interlanguage Variation and Change, Georgetown University Round Table in Languages and Linguistics, 251-9.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref><ref id="B3" content-type="article"><label>3</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>Garrett M, 1975, The Analysis of Sentence Production, in Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Volume 9), Bower G, Academic Press, New York.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref><ref id="B4" content-type="article"><label>4</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>Cutler A, 2011, Slips of the Tongue and Language Production, Walter de Gruyter.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref><ref id="B5" content-type="article"><label>5</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>Kormos J, 1999, Monitoring and Self-Repair in L2. Language Learning, 49(2): 303-42.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref><ref id="B6" content-type="article"><label>6</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>Selinger H, 1980, Utterance Planning and Correction Behavior: Its Function in the Grammar Construction Process for Second Language Learners, in Towards a Cross-Linguistic Assessment of Speech Production, Dechert H, Raupach M, Lang, Cirencester.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref><ref id="B7" content-type="article"><label>7</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>Levelt WJ, 1983, Monitoring and Self-Repair in Speech. Cognition, 14: 41-104.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref><ref id="B8" content-type="article"><label>8</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>Mojavezi A, Ahmadian MJ, 2014, Working Memory Capacity and Self-Repair Behavior in First and Second Language Oral Production. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 43(3): 289-97.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref><ref id="B9" content-type="article"><label>9</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>Fortkamp MBM, 2000, Working Memory Capacity and L2 Speech Production: An Exploration Study.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref><ref id="B10" content-type="article"><label>10</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>Levelt WJ, 1989, Speaking: From Intention to Articulation, MIT press, Cambridge.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref><ref id="B11" content-type="article"><label>11</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>Temple L, 1997, Memory and Processing Modes in Language Learner Speech Production. Communication and Cognition, 30(1): 75-90.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref><ref id="B12" content-type="article"><label>12</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>Daneman M, Carpenter PA, 1980, Individual Differences in Working Memory and Reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(4): 450-66.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
