Cited by 11Second Language Acquisition and LearningLexicography and Language StudiesEnglish Language Learning and Teaching

Overcoming academic vocabulary errors through online corpus consultation: the case of Saudi English majors

Alsehibany, Raniya Abdullah, Abdelhalim, Safaa M.·2025·Computer Assisted Language Learning

Abstract

In the past two decades, corpora have been proposed as valuable computer-assisted tools for teaching and learning academic writing in English at the university level. This article reports on an empirical study that sought to examine the effectiveness of direct corpus consultation in overcoming vocabulary errors in academic writing. This study is part of a larger research project that also investigated students’ attitudes towards direct corpus consultation activities in terms of overcoming vocabulary errors and promoting their learning autonomy as well as the difficulties they encountered. A quantitative quasi-experimental design was used in the present study, which involved 32 Saudi female undergraduates majoring in English for nine weeks of the fourteen-week writing course. Data collection instruments included a pre-post vocabulary test and pre-post writing tests. The results of quantitative and content analyses suggested that direct corpus consultation decreased vocabulary errors and improved students’ academic writing quality. The corpus consultation tasks significantly affected students’ ability to overcome the four targeted types of vocabulary errors (collocation, connotation, word form, and spelling). Furthermore, the results showed that the effectiveness of corpus consultation tasks in improving students’ vocabulary knowledge and usage varied depending on the type of vocabulary error. On the vocabulary test, collocation errors had the smallest decrease and medium effec…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09588221.2023.2249503

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Saudi EFL learners struggle with vocabulary retention and application in writing and speaking.

    “Consequently, learners struggle with vocabulary retention and application in writing and speaking (Ababneh, 2017;Alsehibany & Abdelhalim, 2023), revealing a gap between curricular objectives and actual proficiency (Al-Seghayer, 2017).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alsehibany, R. A., & Abdelhalim, S. M.
Affiliations
Imam Mohammad ibn Saud Islamic University (SA)
Corresponding author
Alsehibany, Raniya Abdullah
Venue
Computer Assisted Language Learning
Published
2023-08-26
Volume
38
Issue
5-6
Pages
1033-1059
ISSN
  • 0958-8221 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-3210
OpenAlex
W4386193520
Cited by
9
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3
FWCI
4.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computer Assisted Language Learning (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Lexicography and Language Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
Keywords
corpus consultation, academic writing, collocation errors, spelling errors, female undergraduates, vocabulary knowledge, writing quality

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