[1] The noticing hypothesis explains the change from linguistic input into intake and is considered a form of conscious processing.
[1][non-primary source needed] Schmidt argued that noticing is not a replacement or a synonym for attention or any other term previously existing, but rather its own function in second language acquisition.
[2] "Noticing" differs from "understanding" in that the former refers to a finite moment where an aspect of language is understood and added to long term memory, rather than a general knowledge.
[1] Through working with Sylvia Frota and conducting monthly conversation recordings, they found that although explicit teaching of forms did not always become intake, linguistic features that he had been previously exposed to did not become apparent until they had been directly pointed out to him.
[5] Truscott argues that the noticing hypothesis should be limited to describing metalinguistic knowledge and not overall language competence.
[5] Tomlin and Villa (1994)[full citation needed] argued that the use of diary studies was not an appropriate choice of material for this research as the actual instance of noticing is a short time frame compared to what the diary can encompass, but overall agreed with the idea that attention must exist for learning to take place.
Ellis stated that noticing occurs only with new linguistic features that the learner encounters which they may find to be difficult.
[7] There exists little research regarding concepts such as cognitive style, depth of processing, self-regulation, and executive attention in the scope of the noticing hypothesis.