Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T17:31:00.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

PROCESSING VARIABILITY IN INTENTIONAL AND INCIDENTAL WORD LEARNING

AN EXTENSION OF SOLOVYEVA AND DEKEYSER (2018)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 November 2019

Bronson Hui Open the ORCID record for Bronson Hui [Opens in a new window]
Bronson Hui*
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
*
*Correspondence concerning this study should be addressed to Bronson Hui, Second Language Studies Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I investigated the trajectory of processing variability, as measured by coefficient of variation (CV), using an intentional word learning experiment and reanalyzing published eye-tracking data of an incidental word learning study (Elgort et al., 2018). In the word learning experiment, native English speakers (N = 35) studied Swahili-English word pairs (k = 16) before performing 10 blocks of animacy judgment tasks. Results replicated the initial CV increase reported in Solovyeva and DeKeyser (2018) and, importantly, captured a roughly inverted U-shaped development in CV. In the reanalysis of eye-tracking data, I computed CVs based on reading times on the target and control words. Results did not reveal a similar inverted U-shaped development over time but suggested more stable processing of the high-frequency control words. Taken together, these results uncovered a fuller trajectory in CV development, differences in processing demands for different aspects of word knowledge, and the potential use of CV with eye-tracking research.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , May 2020 , pp. 327 - 357
Open Practices
Open materials Open data
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This piece of research is supported by the Second Language Studies PhD Program at Michigan State University. I would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their insightful feedback that has helped strengthened the paper. I would also like to thank Drs. Aline Godfroid, Shawn Loewen, and Patti Spinner for their constructive comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. I must also thank Lizz Huntley and my peers on LLT 864 Second Language Psycholinguistics for their ideas. Audience members in my talk at SLRF 2018 in Montreal and members in our Daily Writing Slacker group offered very useful comments as well. All errors, however, remain my own. Finally, I am very grateful for the sharing of published data by Dr. Irina Elgort and colleagues.

The experiment in this article earned Open Data and Open Materials badges for transparent practices. The materials are available at https://osf.io/2ta7m/.

References

REFERENCES

Akamatsu, N. (2008). The effects of training on automatization of word recognition in English as a foreign language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29, 175–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychological Review, 89, 369–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1983). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartolotti, J., & Marian, V. (2014, January). Wordlikeness and novel word learning. In Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society, 36, 146–151. Retrieved from www.escholarship.org/content/qt2j8652jh/qt2j8652jh.pdf.Google Scholar
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, H., & Gaskell, M. G. (2014). The time-course of talker-specificity and lexical competition effects during word learning. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29, 1163–1179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kuĉera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 977–990.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 497–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2007). Situating the concept of practice. In DeKeyser, R. (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 1–18). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2015). Skill acquisition theory. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 94–112). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
De Vos, J. F., Schriefers, H., Nivard, M. G., & Lemhöfer, K. (2018). A meta‐analysis and meta‐regression of incidental second language word learning from spoken input. Language Learning, 68, 906–941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dirix, N., Cop, U., Drieghe, D., & Duyck, W. (2017). Cross-lingual neighborhood effects in generalized lexical decision and natural reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43, 887.Google ScholarPubMed
Elgort, I. (2011). Deliberate learning and vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Language Learning, 61, 367–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elgort, I., Brysbaert, M., Stevens, M., & Van Assche, E. (2018). Contextual word learning during reading in a second language: An eye-movement study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 341–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elgort, I., & Warren, P. (2014). L2 vocabulary learning from reading: Explicit and tacit lexical knowledge and the role of learner and item variables. Language Learning, 64, 365–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, A., Miles, J., & Field, Z. (2012). Discovering statistics using R. New York, NY: Sage.Google Scholar
Gass, S. (1999). Discussion: Incidental vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 319–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfroid, A. (2019). Investigating instructed second language acquisition using L2 learners’ eye-tracking data. In Leow, R. P. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language research in classroom learning (pp. 44–57). New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfroid, A. (2020a). Eye tracking in second language acquisition and bilingualism: A research synthesis and methodological guide (pp. 433–453). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A. (2020b). Sensitive measures of vocabulary knowledge and processing: Expanding nation’s framework. In Webb, S. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies (pp. 433–453). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A., Ahn, J., Choi, I., Ballard, L., Cui, Y., Johnston, S., … Yoon, H. J. (2018). Incidental vocabulary learning in a natural reading context: An eye-tracking study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21, 563–584.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A., Boers, F., & Housen, A. (2013). An eye for words: Gauging the role of attention in incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition by means of eye-tracking. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 483–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfroid, A., & Winke, P. (2015). Investigating implicit and explicit processing using L2 learners’ eye-movement data. In Rebuschat, P. (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 325–348). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hox, J. J., Moerbeek, M., & Van de Schoot, R. (2018). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258–286). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H., Van Gelderen, A., & Schoonen, R. (2009). Automatization in second language acquisition: What does the coefficient of variation tell us? Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 555–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N. (2000). Lexical representation and development in a second language. Applied Linguistics, 21, 47–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N. (2002). Form-meaning mapping in vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 617–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuperman, V., Drieghe, D., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2013). How strongly do word reading times and lexical decision times correlate? Combining data from eye movement corpora and megastudies. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 563–580.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leow, R. P. (2015). Explicit learning in the L2 classroom: A student-centered approach. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lim, H., & Godfroid, A. (2015). Automatization in second language sentence processing: A partial, conceptual replication of Hulstijn, Van Gelderen, and Schoonen’s 2009 study. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 1247–1282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linck, J. A., & Cunnings, I. (2015). The utility and application of mixed‐effects models in second language research. Language Learning, 65, 185–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsden, E., Mackey, A., & Plonsky, L. (2015). The IRIS repository of instruments for research into second languages. In Mackey, A. & Marsden, E. (Eds.), Advancing methodology and practice (pp. 1–22), New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Matuschek, H., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., Baayen, H., & Bates, D. (2017). Balancing Type I error and power in linear mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 305–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, K., & Marsden, E. (2019). Signatures of automaticity during practice: Explicit instruction about L1 processing routines can improve L2 grammatical processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 40, 205–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mirman, D. (2014). Growth curve analysis and visualization using R. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press.Google Scholar
Mohamed, A. A. (2017). Exposure frequency in L2 reading: An eye-movement perspective of incidental vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 269–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montero Perez, M., Peters, E., & Desmet, P. (2018). Vocabulary learning through viewing video: The effect of two enhancement techniques. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pellicer-Sánchez, A. (2016). Incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition from and while reading: An eye-tracking study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 97–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, E., & Webb, S. (2018). Incidental vocabulary acquisition through viewing L2 television and factors that affect learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 551–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, N., Segalowitz, N., O’Brien, I., & Yamasaki, N. (2004). Semantic priming in a first and second language: Evidence from reaction time variability and event-related brain potentials. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17, 237–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pili-Moss, D., Brill-Schuetz, K., Faretta-Stutenberg, M., & Morgan-Short, K. (2019). Contributions of declarative and procedural memory to accuracy and automatization during second language practice. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1017/S1366728919000543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2012). Using EZ Reader to simulate eye movements in nonreading tasks: A unified framework for understanding the eye–mind link. Psychological Review, 119, 155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Revelle, W. (2018) psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych Version = 1.8.3Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N., & Frenkiel-Fishman, S. (2005). Attention control and ability level in a complex cognitive skill: Attention shifting and second-language proficiency. Memory & Cognition, 33, 644–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N. S., & Segalowitz, S. J. (1993). Skilled performance, practice, and the differentiation of speed-up from automatization effects: Evidence from second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 14, 369–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N., Watson, V., & Segalowitz, S. (1995). Vocabulary skill: Single-case assessment of automaticity of word recognition in a timed lexical decision task. Second Language Research, 11, 121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, S. J., Segalowitz, N. S., & Wood, A. G. (1998). Assessing the development of automaticity in second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solovyeva, K., & DeKeyser, R. (2018). Response time variability signatures of novel work learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 225–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Y. (2018). The role of procedural learning ability in automatization of L2 morphology under different learning schedules: An exploratory study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 923–937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uchihara, T., Webb, S., & Yanagisawa, A. (2019). The effects of repetition on incidental vocabulary learning: A meta-analysis of correlational studies. Language Learning, 69, 559–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, I., & Hulme, C. (1999). Concrete words are easier to recall than abstract words: Evidence for a semantic contribution to short-term serial recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1256.Google Scholar
Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 33–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, R. (2005). Introduction to robust estimation and hypothesis testing. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar