“When you talk, you are only repeating what you already know. But if you listen, you may learn something new” (unattributed)
“Some people believe talking a lot is key. Can be true, but don’t forget that talking a lot means repeating your own mistakes all the time. Then it becomes harder and harder to get rid if them. Talking a lot works only if you pay a lot of attention to listening all the time and always assume that you’re still missing something.” (Gaudfroy)
Note, also, that all natives spend years focused on input first, followed by increasing output after 5-10 years. There is really no exception to this. Yet a lot of second language learning focuses on writing early in order to pass tests, or “speak from day 1” type marketing scams and nonsense.
No one has really done much work on interleaving and language learning, and the work that has been done is pretty limited.
Mostly, interleaving appears as a sensible argument for “mixing it up” and “keeping things interesting/varied”.
For example; mix up the content level (interleaving “easy natural” with “hard native” content), mix up the material or medium (interleaving tv, radio, magazines, forums, chatting, different lingq courses etc), switch language activity (interleaving reading/listening/writing/speaking), interleave formal and informal registers, mix up language type (interleaving between different languages over various time frames) etc.
Interleaving is also, sometimes, contrasted against; anki/srs/flashcarding massed practices, massed sentence M-CCD type materials, grammar learning massed practices, artificial drilling, a focus on one main learning activity (speaking your way to “Benny-fluency”) etc.
However, sometimes, perceived “good” learning at lingq, like – listening and reading to varied content - can often become a massed practice of just listening to, and reading, similar content, with diminishing returns. Additionally, constantly changing up, or mixing in, learning such as; a quick grammar review, frequent skype chats, essay writing etc, often will have benefits.
In many ways it is just another argument for learning like a native. Organically …eclectically …not like an automaton in a classroom.
Personally, I prefer mixing up “easy natural” dialogues, with varied native content. And for the native content to come mostly from chat radio - that has a mix of topics delivered in a rapid-fire “earthy” manner. I also prefer techniques like “reflection” and “elaboration” as learning tools, which are under-rated, imo.