Processing immediate written corrective feedback during online collaborative writing: A depth of processing perspective

Abstract

This study investigates how learners process immediate written corrective feedback (IWCF) during collaborative writing tasks in a synchronous, computer-mediated environment. Drawing on depth of processing (DoP) as an analytical lens, the study examines how feedback type—direct, indirect, and metalinguistic—influences learner engagement and immediate accuracy. Data were collected from intermediate-level learners of French as a second language (L2) using screen recordings, chat logs, and Google Docs revisions during online writing tasks. Results indicate that feedback type significantly shaped learners’ engagement. Direct feedback led to high rates of immediate correction but was typically associated with minimal cognitive engagement. In contrast, metalinguistic feedback prompted deeper processing, characterized by hypothesis testing, rule recall, and collaborative negotiation. Indirect feedback produced mixed results: while some learners overlooked it, others engaged in collaborative problem-solving to interpret and revise errors. The synchronous context appeared to amplify the impact of feedback by enabling real-time interaction, visibility, and reinvestment of teacher comments into the writing process. These findings highlight the importance of tailoring feedback types to task goals and learner needs, particularly within task-based language teaching (TBLT) frameworks. The study underscores the pedagogical potential of combining real-time feedback with structured peer collaboration in digital environments to support both accuracy and autonomy in L2 writing. Implications are discussed for optimizing corrective feedback practices in online, task-based instructional settings.