Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title>
<jats:p>This study explored the effects of reading-only, listening-only, and reading-while-listening input modes on incidental vocabulary acquisition and retention of knowledge over time. 104 L2 English, L1 Japanese-speaking participants from two universities in Japan were divided into three input-mode groups. A PsychoPy application was employed to present a narrative and test participants using written-receptive meaning-recall and multiple-choice meaning-recognition tests. A 2716-word narrative containing nine pseudowords that replaced concrete nouns at a frequency of 10, 15, or 20 encounters in the text was used. Input mode matched testing mode in this study, whereas previous studies tested reading-while-listening using reading-based tests only as reported by Brown et al. (Reading in a Foreign Language 20:136–163, 2008), Malone (Studies in Second Language Acquisition 40:651-675, 2018), Teng (Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 12:274–288, 2018), and The TwiLex Group (Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2024-06:1-26, 2024) and did not consider transfer appropriateness during testing, which may cause mode-specific lexical knowledge to go unmeasured. The data were analyzed using a generalized linear mixed effects model, which found that incidental vocabulary gains were statistically lower for listening-only than reading-while-listening and reading-only on both test types. No statistically significant difference was found between reading-only and reading-while-listening for meaning-recognition tests, despite an 8-min average difference in reading time for reading-only, meaning reading-while-listening appeared to be more efficient for acquisition when testing and treatment mode matched. There was a statistically significant difference in favor of reading-only vs. reading-while-listening for meaning-recall tests. No differences were found in the rate of decay for input mode or test type, but meaning-recall displayed lower gains than meaning-recognition tests. A future study that might better measure mode-specific differences is also proposed.
</jats:p>

DOI： 10.1186/s40468-025-00367-8

researchmap

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

DOI： 10.29140/vli.v14n1.2161

researchmap

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

researchmap

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

DOI： 10.58887/ijodel.v8i2.96

researchmap

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Vocabulary Learning and Instruction  

<jats:p>The main purpose of this study was to provide validity evidence to support the creation and use of three instruments theorised to measure the existence of the form-meaning link between three sets of nonwords, and their assigned meanings within an experiment. The experimental study used a counterbalanced Latin square design to examine and compare three conditions of deliberate vocabulary study (word cards and two variations of tablet-based augmented reality) across three thematically constrained sets of controlled nonwords. The collected data gathered with the three delayed post tests conducted for each of the sets from the experiment were subjected to separate Rasch analyses, which are described in this study. The findings serve as evidence of construct validity and show: (1) the instruments performed as predicted by two a priori hypotheses, (2) the items were found to display good fit as to the expectations of the Rasch model, (3) each of the three instruments were found to be unidimensional, and (4) with no changes, these three instruments are expected to yield similar results if they were to be used to measure participants within a similar context from the same population.</jats:p>

DOI： 10.7820/vli.v11.2.dabrowski

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

Dabrowski, A., & Stone, A. (2024) AR Flash (Version 0.9) [Mobile app]. App Store. https://apps.apple.com/jp/

researchmap