Overcoming academic vocabulary errors through online corpus consultation: the case of Saudi English majors
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
Cites
Statistics
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?
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).”
From Integrating ChatGPT for vocabulary learning and retention: A classroom-based study of Saudi EFL learners (2025) · cites this paper as Alsehibany & Abdelhalim, 2023
Cites
Learning Vocabulary in Another Language
Nation, I. S. P. (2001) · Cambridge University Press · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139524759 · Cited by 6,608 · see citing works
Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement
Laufer, B. (2001) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/22.1.1 · Cited by 1,334 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Research has shown that more interactive, student-centred, and authentic approaches can improve L2 students’ writing, including vocabulary learning (Laufer & Hulstijn, 2001; Xu, 2015).”
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Abdelhalim, S. M., & Alsehibany, R. (2025) · Language Learning & Technology · doi:10.64152/10125/73635 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Self-citationIndependent corpus consultation for collocation use in academic writing by L2 graduate students
Hua, Y., Lu, X.-F., & Guo, Q. (2024) · System (Linköping) · doi:10.1016/j.system.2024.103515 · Cited by 7
Li, F., & Zhang, Y. (2026) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/13621688251406901 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Exploring Emerging Issues in Corpus Applications in ELT: A Systematic Review
Emir, G., & Saral, N. Ç. (2025) · Participatory Educational Research · doi:10.17275/per.25.16.12.2 · Cited by 5
Study on computer-based systematic foreign language vocabulary teaching
Wu, J. (2024) · The JALT CALL Journal · doi:10.29140/jaltcall.v20n3.1126 · Cited by 2
“Plenty of research (Alsehibany & Abdelhalim, 2023; Lee & Lin, 2019; Lee et al., 2019; Liu & Lei, 2018) indicates that FL teaching quality and learning efficiency can be enhanced with the help of corpora and a concordancer.”
BackgroundModeling expression of the research gap in text-based reading instruction
Ferdiansyah, S., & Picard, M. (2025) · Journal of Second Language Studies · doi:10.1075/jsls.00042.fer · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Yin, X.-X. (2026) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/13621688261489747
A Diachronic Investigation of Individual Differences and Writing Quality in Data-Driven Learning
Zhao, Y. J., 曹思琦, & Dong, J. (2026) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/13621688261449333
Trần, D., Triet, A. M., & Nguyen, T. L. N. (2025) · International journal of innovative research and scientific studies · doi:10.53894/ijirss.v8i3.7167
“As indicated by Alsehibany and Abdelhalim [32], many students depend on exposure through reading and indirect learning rather than systematic teaching, which creates a gap that undermines their confidence in utilizing collocations in their writing.”
Söğüt, S. (2024) · GiST Education and Learning Research Journal · doi:10.26817/16925777.1777
Learning Vocabulary Through Concordancing Vs. Chatgpt; Machine Or Ai?
Heidari, H. (2025) · i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching · doi:10.26634/jelt.15.1.21399
- 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
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- 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