Cited by 5Second Language Acquisition and LearningNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismReading and Literacy Development

Neural activity related to productive vocabulary knowledge effects during second language comprehension

Open access
Allal-Sumoto, Takara Kenza, Şahin, Duygu, Mizuhara, Hiroaki·2024·Neuroscience Research

Abstract

Second language learners and educators often believe that improving one's listening ability hinges on acquiring an extensive vocabulary and engaging in thorough listening practice. Our previous study suggested that listening comprehension is also impacted by the ability to produce vocabulary. Nevertheless, it remained uncertain whether quick comprehension could be attributed to a simple acceleration of processing or to changes in neural activity. To identify neural activity changes during sentence listening comprehension according to different levels of lexical knowledge (productive, only comprehensive, uncomprehensive), we measured participants' electrical activity in the brain via electroencephalography (EEG) and conducted a time-frequency-based EEG power analysis. Additionally, we employed a decoding model to verify the predictability of vocabulary knowledge levels based on neural activity. The decoding results showed that EEG activity could discriminate between listening to sentences containing phrases that include productive knowledge and ones without. The positive impact of productive vocabulary knowledge on sentence comprehension, driven by distinctive neural processing during sentence comprehension, was unequivocally evident. Our study emphasizes the importance of productive vocabulary knowledge acquisition to enhance the process of second language listening comprehension.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neures.2024.01.002

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Our findings contrast with earlier research which found that technology-based vocabulary instruction primarily benefited receptive knowledge rather than production.

    “Interestingly, our findings contrast with earlier research (e.g., Allal-Sumoto et al., 2024;Bueno-Alastuey & Nemeth, 2020), which found that technology-based vocabulary instruction primarily benefited receptive knowledge rather than production.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Allal-Sumoto, T. K., Şahin, D., & Mizuhara, H.
Affiliations
Kyoto University (JP)
Corresponding author
Mizuhara, Hiroaki
Venue
Neuroscience Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-06
Volume
203
Pages
8-17
ISSN
0168-0102 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4391056034
Cited by
5
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2
FWCI
3.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroscience Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (21K12610, 22H03913, 23H01648)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
second language listening comprehension, productive vocabulary knowledge, vocabulary knowledge, neuronal activity, EEG decoding, sentence comprehension, vocabulary acquisition, time-frequency analysis
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Male, Speech Perception, Vocabulary, Multilingualism, Comprehension, Young Adult

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