6.5 conclusion
    the key findings relevant to research questions three and four are:
    (a) in general, only weak correlations between reported metacognitive listening awareness and listening comprehension and incidental vocabulary acquisition were found. one possible explanation for this is that the learners' reported use of metacognitive strategies did not actually correspond closely to their actual use of them while performing the listening tasks. in order for learners to act on their preferred metacognitive strategies, they may need time to implement them. it is also possible that any relationship between reported preferred strategy use and listening comprehension will only become evident over time and may not be evident in particular short listening tasks.
    (b) one of the clearest findings was the negative relationship between reported use of mental translation and listening comprehension and incidental vocabulary acquisition. though mental translation was a favoured strategy by the less proficient learners in the sample, it assisted neither listening comprehension nor incidental vocabulary acquisition in the kinds of online input-processing tasks required by the instructional tasks used in this study.
    (c) the relationship between reported use of metacognitive strategies and listening comprehension and incidental vocabulary acquisition was most clearly evident in group b, the three-time listening group, which received no training. one possible explanation for this is that the learners in this group were free to use their preferred strategies. in contrast, the learners in groups c and d may have felt the need to use strategies relevant to the training they had received.