The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
List learning of second language vocabulary
Abstract
The learning of second language vocabulary in lists of word pairs is a widespread practice. A basic practical question in this respect is whether it is more effective for nonfluent bilinguals to learn word pairs in first language–second language order (Ll–L2), or vice versa. To date, experimental psychology has not given a clear answer to this question, partly because it has not addressed the relevant issues directly. This article reviews some aspects of psychology that are relevant to L2 vocabulary list learning and reports on an experiment conducted with comprehensive (high) school students, aged 11–13, who were learning French. The experiment examined the presentation of vocabulary items to be learned. It was found that presenting items in L1–L2 order was the more versatile form of presentation if both production and comprehension of L2 items were required on the part of the learner. The theoretical implications of the findings, relating to the structure of the bilingual lexicon, are also discussed.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Producti v e learning typically results in more and stronger knowledge than recepti v e learning (Griffin & Harley, 1996).”
From The Four Strands (2007) · cites this paper as Griffin & Harley, 1996
Citations
Cites
Levels of processing: A framework for memory research
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(72)80001-x · Cited by 9,566
Paivio, A. (2013) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315798868 · Cited by 4,184
Mezei, Á., & Paivio, A. (1972) · Leonardo · doi:10.2307/1572599 · Cited by 3,265
The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research
Clark, H. H. (1973) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(73)80014-3 · Cited by 2,265
The Handbook of Research on Teaching
Ryans, D. G., & Gage, N. L. (1962) · Journal of Teacher Education · doi:10.1177/002248716201300121 · Cited by 1,975
Teaching and learning vocabulary
Nation, P. (1994) · System · doi:10.1016/0346-251x(94)90065-5 · Cited by 1,743
The serial position effect of free recall.
Murdock, B. B. (1962) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0045106 · Cited by 1,717
Schmidt, R. A., & Bjork, R. A. (1992) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00029.x · Cited by 1,582
Teaching and Learning Vocabulary
Gader, R., & Taylor, L. K. (1991) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3587090 · Cited by 1,443
Battig, W. F., Tulving, E., & Donaldson, W. (1973) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421962 · Cited by 1,428
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Tulving, 1968, Verbal behavior and general behavior theory, 2
- Kroll, 1993, The bilingual lexicon, 63
- Jacoby, 1979, Levels of processing in human memory, 1
- Lado, 1967, Massive vocabulary expansion in foreign language beyond the basic course: The effects of stimuli, timing, and order of presentation
- Meara, 1984, Interlanguage, 225
- Meara, 1987, Vocabulary in a second language
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Research Methods in Applied Linguistics
(2021) · Research methods in applied linguistics · doi:10.1075/rmal · Cited by 2,782
Nation, P. (2017) · Indonesian JELT Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching · doi:10.25170/ijelt.v12i1.1458 · Cited by 623
RECEPTIVE AND PRODUCTIVE VOCABULARY LEARNING: The Effects of Reading and Writing on Word Knowledge
Webb, S. (2005) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263105050023 · Cited by 527
Incidental and Intentional Learning
Hulstijn, J. H. (2003) · The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1002/9780470756492.ch12 · Cited by 532
Nation, P. (2007) · Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching · doi:10.2167/illt039.0 · Cited by 494
“Productive learning typically results in more and stronger knowledge than receptive learning (Griffin & Harley, 1996).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Griffin, G., & Harley, T. A.
- Affiliations
- Bournemouth University (GB)
- University of Warwick (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Griffin, Gerry
- ORCID
- Harley, Trevor A.
- Venue
- Applied Psycholinguistics
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1996-10
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 443-460
- ISSN
- 0142-7164 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-1817
- OpenAlex
- W1996516627
- Cited by
- 129
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 0.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Applied Psycholinguistics (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Keywords
- second language vocabulary acquisition, list learning, word pairs, bilingual lexicons, French as a second language, presentation order, bilingual adolescents
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
