CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 107Second Language Acquisition and LearningEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningReading and Literacy Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

INCIDENTAL VOCABULARY LEARNING IN SLA: EFFECTS OF FREQUENCY, AURAL ENHANCEMENT, AND WORKING MEMORY

Malone, Jonathan·2018·Studies in Second Language Acquisition
DOI 10.1017/s0272263117000341
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract This study explored the roles of exposure frequency, aural enhancement (AE) of input, and individual differences in working memory (WM) during L2 incidental vocabulary learning while reading. Eighty intermediate-level English learners were divided into four treatment groups, and given reading tasks with target words embedded two or four times. Listening while reading was controlled, as well as duration of exposure to new words through timed reading tasks, and comprehension questions helped to ensure a focus on meaning. Surprise posttests assessed initial form recognition and form-meaning connections. Proficiency and WM measures were administered, with English proficiency used as a covariate. Results indicated that measurable learning occurred at the two-exposure level for new words, both in form recognition and form-meaning connections. Frequency effects held from two to four exposures across AE and non-AE conditions, but were influenced by AE on the form-meaning outcome. This indicated support for simultaneous input modalities facilitating deeper processing and better learning outcomes. WM outcomes correlated with vocabulary outcomes for form recognition, and an aptitude by treatment interaction was found for form recognition.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0272263117000341

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 82 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–107 of 107

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Malone, J.
Affiliations
University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Corresponding author
Malone, Jonathan
ORCID
Malone, Jonathan
Venue
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2018-02-19
Volume
40
Issue
3
Pages
651-675
ISSN
  • 0272-2631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-1545
DOI
10.1017/s0272263117000341
OpenAlex
W2794250378
Cited by
100
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 1
FWCI
12.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified)
Locations
Studies in Second Language Acquisition (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
incidental vocabulary learning, exposure frequency, listening while reading, working memory, individual differences, shape recognition, form-meaning connections, second language reading, ESL learners

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