Showing posts with label modality dominance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label modality dominance. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 24, 2020

Recipe for curing (Chinese) distaste for pronunciation teaching

Have trouble selling your students on pronunciation, developing an 'appetite" for it? Research by Madzharov, Self-Control and Touch: When Does Direct Versus Indirect Touch Increase Hedonic Evaluations and Consumption of Food, summarized by Science Direct, suggests that you may just need to give at least the more self-controlled among them a "hands-on" taste of it to get them to buy in. To quote the abstract:

"The present paper presents four studies that explore how sampling and eating food by touching it directly with hands affects hedonic evaluations and consumption volume."

What they found, however, was that for only the high self-control, disciplined consumers that they perceived the food to be better tasting and they were disposed to eat more of it. For the other subjects (like me maybe!), adding touch did not appear to contribute or enhance either taste or appetite for the food samples in the study. Why that should be the case, was not clear, other than the possibility that in the less self-controlled consumers, the executive control centers of the brain were offline already in terms of the direct, unfettered attraction of FOOD!

A few years ago, had a visiting scholar from China here with us for a year. It took almost the entire time for her to get me to understand how to get Chinese students to buy in to (haptic) pronunciation teaching, specifically, but, in general, more integrated, communicative pronunciation work. My "mistake" had been trying to convince relatively high-control consumers of pronunciation teaching in this case, to first be more like me, less high-control and more experiential as learners.

It has always been a problem for some, not just the Chinese students, to buy into highly gesture-based instruction. But touch was another thing entirely. Most any student can "get it", how touch can enhance learning and memory-- and be coaxed into trying some of the gestural, kinaethetic techniques. Probably for several reasons, one being that the functions of touch in the haptic system are to (1) carefully control gesture use, and (2) intensify the connection between the gesture and lexical or phonological target, the word or sound process. Also, it was  (3) much easier to present the general, popular research on the contribution of touch to experience and learning, and (4) the concept of somehow getting a learner to work in their least dominant modality, a basic construct in hypnosis, for example, can be the most effective or powerful.

The assumption here is that the metacognitively self-controlled are less likely to be influenced by immediate feelings or impressions, but once that "barrier" is bridged, as touch does so effectively, the relatively novel sensual experience for them has greater impact. Think: men and the power of perfume . . .

In other words focusing initially on the touch that concluded every gesture made a difference. Have been doing that ever since. Students are much more receptive to trying the gestural techniques once they feel that they have sufficient understanding . . . and then once they have tried it, focusing more on touch than on gesture . .  they are "hooked" . . . being more able and amenable to sense the power of embodiment in learning pronunciation from then on.

If you have a taste for pronunciation work with Chinese students, what is your recipe?

Keep in touch . . .

Original Source:
Madzharov, A. Self-Control and Touch: When Does Direct Versus Indirect Touch Increase Hedonic Evaluations and Consumption of Food Journal of Retailing Volume 95, Issue 4, December 2019, Pages 170-185 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2019.10.009


Friday, July 22, 2011

Pronunciation modalities: out of sight--but IN mind!.

clip art: Clker
In this 2009 study of modality dominance, by Hecht and Reiner, when visual is paired one-on-one with either haptic or auditory competing stimuli, visual consistently overpowers either of the two. When the three are presented simultaneously, however, the dominance of visual disappears. That may explain why having some learners focus on a visual schema (such as the orthography) while articulating or practicing a new sound may not turn out to be very efficient--or doing a kinesthetic "dance" of some kind to practice a rhythm pattern (without speaking at the same time) while looking at something in the visual field, may not work all that well either for some learners.

The presence of eye engagement may override or nullify information in the competing modality. In HICP, where all three modalities are usually engaged, the "distracting" influence of sight is at least lessened. In fact, the tri-modality "hexus" should only better  facilitate the integration of the graphic word, the felt (haptic) sense of producing it and the internal (auditory) bone- resonance and vibrations. Although a substantial amount of pronunciation learning may be better accomplished with eyes closed, tri-modal (haptic, visual and auditory) techniques probably come in a close second. We will "see" in forthcoming research!

A touch for pronunciation learning? Hyper- and Hypo-hatics

Clip art: Clker
Autotelic need-for-touch subjects in this 2007 study by Krishna and Morrin were better at distinguishing "diagnostic" from "non-diagnostic" touch in relation to food attractiveness. In other words, if the "feel" of a product related to its essence or identity, for example, the softness of a banana, the "autotels" were better at recognizing it. Likewise, they were better at ignoring non-taste relevant features, such as the feel of the label. Non-autotels, were less able to get diagnostic features--but were likely to be more taken in by non-diagnostic features. (You can "see" the implications for marketing in grocery stores!)

The research includes a very informal questionnaire to self-identify degree of haptic need-to-touch which I could easily amplify and use in research. We see constantly the range of "autotelicity" in our students. If we can identify that by degree, perhaps we can, as the research suggests, develop ways to better orient students at either end of the continuum to their use of hapticity in learning the system. That will certainly help in selling the "product!"