Cited by 82Reading and Literacy DevelopmentSecond Language Acquisition and LearningLanguage Development and Disorders

Examining incidental word learning during reading in children: The role of context

Open access
Joseph, Holly, Nation, Kate·2018·Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

Abstract

From mid-childhood onward, children learn hundreds of new words every year incidentally through reading. Yet little is known about this process and the circumstances in which vocabulary acquisition is maximized. We examined whether encountering novel words in semantically diverse, rather than semantically uniform, contexts led to better learning. Children aged 10 and 11years read sentences containing novel words while their eye movements were monitored. Results showed a reduction in reading times over exposure for all children, but especially for those with good reading comprehension. There was no difference in reading times or in offline post-test performance for words encountered in semantically diverse and uniform contexts, but diversity did interact with reading comprehension skill. Contextual informativeness also affected reading behavior. We conclude that children acquire word knowledge from incidental reading, that children with better comprehension skills are more efficient and competent learners, and that although varying the semantic diversity of the reading episodes did not improve learning per se in our laboratory manipulation of diversity, diversity does affect reading behavior in less direct ways.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jecp.2017.08.010

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Young readers can use context and morphology in their word meaning inferences.

    “Our research confirms findings from the literature that young readers can use context and morphology in their word meaning inferences (e.g., Cain et al., 2003;Joseph & Nation, 2018;McCutchen & Logan, 2011;Ricketts et al., 2011;Zhang & Shulley, 2017)”

    From Use of morphological and contextual cues in children’s lexical inferencing in L1 and L2 (2021) · cites this paper as Joseph & Nation, 2018

    The Discussion reports that children inferred word meanings from reading exposures, supporting the context part of the claim. The Method says the -ed ending offered a clue that a target word was a verb, but it does not establish that children used morphology to infer the word’s meaning; the number of morphemes was recorded as a word characteristic, not tested as an inference cue. The indexed passages provide no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. Adelman, J. S., Brown, G. D., & Quesada, J. F. (2006). Contextual diversity, not word frequency, determines word-naming and lexical decision times. Psychological Science, 17(9), 814-823.
  2. 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(3), 255-278.
  3. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & McCaslin, E. S. (1983). Vocabulary development: All contexts are not created equal. The Elementary School Journal, 83(3), 177-181.
  4. Bolger, D. J., Balass, M., Landen, E., & Perfetti, C. A. (2008). Context variation and definitions in learning the meanings of words: An instance-based learning approach. Discourse Processes, 45(2), 122-159.
  5. Cain, K., Oakhill, J. V., & Elbro, C. (2003). The ability to learn new word meanings from context by school-age children with and without language comprehension difficulties. Journal of Child Language, 30(03), 681-694.
  6. Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Lemmon, K. (2004). Individual differences in the inference of word meanings from context: The influence of reading comprehension, vocabulary knowledge, and memory capacity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 671.
  7. Chaffin, R., Morris, R. K., & Seely, R. E. (2001). Learning new word meanings from context: a study of eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(1), 225.
  8. Elgort, I., Brysbaert, M., Stevens, M., & Van Assche, E. (in press). Contextual word learning during reading in a second language: An eye-movement study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition.
  9. Hoffman, P., & Woollams, A. M. (2015). Opposing effects of semantic diversity in lexical and semantic relatedness decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41(2), 385.
  10. Johns, B. T., Dye, M., & Jones, M. N. (2015). The influence of contextual diversity on word learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1-7.
  11. Jones, M. N., Johns, B. T., & Recchia, G. (2012). The role of semantic diversity in lexical organization. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(2), 115.
  12. Joseph, H. S., Wonnacott, E., Forbes, P., & Nation, K. (2014). Becoming a written word: Eye movements reveal order of acquisition effects following incidental exposure to new words during silent reading. Cognition, 133(1), 238-248.
  13. Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2007). Repeated retrieval during learning is the key to long-term retention. Journal of Memory and Language, 57(2), 151-162.
  14. Lowell, R., & Morris, R. K. (2014). Word length effects on novel words: Evidence from eye movements. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76(1), 179-189.
  15. Nagy, W. E., & Anderson, R. C. (1984). How many words are there in printed school English? Reading Research Quarterly, 304-330.
  16. Nation, K. (2017). Nurturing a lexical legacy: reading experience is critical for the development of word reading skill. Science of Learning, 2(1), 3.
  17. Nation, K., Angell, P., & Castles, A. (2007). Orthographic learning via self-teaching in children learning to read English: Effects of exposure, durability, and context. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 96(1), 71-84.
  18. Nation, K. & Castles, A. (in press). Putting the learning in to orthographic learning. In K. Cain, D. Compton & R. Parrila (Eds.) Theories of reading development.
  19. Nation, K., Snowling, M. J., & Clarke, P. (2007). Dissecting the relationship between language skills and learning to read: Semantic and phonological contributions to new vocabulary learning in children with poor reading comprehension. Advances in Speech Language Pathology, 9(2), 131-139.
  20. Perea, M., Soares, A. P., & Comesaña, M. (2013). Contextual diversity is a main determinant of word identification times in young readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116(1), 37-44.
  21. Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357-383.
  22. Plummer, P., Perea, M., & Rayner, K. (2014). The influence of contextual diversity on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(1), 275.
  23. Share, D. L. (2004). Orthographic learning at a glance: On the time course and developmental onset of self-teaching. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 87(4), 267-298.
  24. von der Malsburg, T. & Angele, B. (in press). False Positives and Other Statistical Errors in Standard Analyses of Eye Movements in Reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 119-133.
  25. Vorstius, C., Radach, R., Mayer, M. B., & Lonigan, C. J. (2013). Monitoring local comprehension monitoring in sentence reading. School Psychology Review, 42(2), 191- 206.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Joseph, H., & Nation, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Reading (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Joseph, Holly
Venue
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-02
Volume
166
Pages
190-211
ISSN
0022-0965 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2757564510
Cited by
82
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
11.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Child Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Experimental Psychology Society and the British Academy
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/M009998/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
Keywords
incidental vocabulary learning, vocabulary acquisition, reading, semantic diversity, context, reading comprehension, eye movements, reading time, children, vocabulary knowledge
MeSH terms
Child, Eye Movements, Female, Humans, Male, Reading, Semantics, Verbal Learning, Vocabulary, Comprehension

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review