The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Effects of Corpus Use on Second Language Vocabulary Learning: A Multilevel Meta-analysis
Abstract
This study investigates the effects of corpus use on second language (L2) vocabulary learning as well as the influence of moderators on effectiveness. Based on 29 studies representing 38 unique samples, all of which met several criteria for inclusion (e.g. with control groups), we found an overall positive medium-sized effect of corpus use on L2 vocabulary learning for both short-term (77 posttest effect sizes; Hedges’ g = 0.74, SE = 0.09, p < .001) and long-term periods (34 follow-up effect sizes; Hedges’ g = 0.64, SE = 0.17, p < .001). Furthermore, large variation in adjusted mean effect sizes across moderators was revealed. Above all, for the different dimensions of L2 vocabulary knowledge, in-depth knowledge (i.e. referential meanings as well as syntactic features of vocabulary) was associated with a large effect size. Moreover, the results revealed that learners’ L2 proficiency and several features of corpus use (i.e. interaction types, corpus types, training, and duration) influence the magnitude of the effectiveness of corpus use in improving L2 vocabulary learning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1989.10488618 · Cited by 99,167
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(1990) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,269
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
(2001) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 27,577
Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods.
Longford, N. T., Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1993) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2075823 · Cited by 18,724
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods
Davidian, M. (2003) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/jasa.2003.s288 · Cited by 13,723
(2002) · Cited by 13,211
Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis
Wasserman, S., Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1988) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164953 · Cited by 10,326
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
Cited by
Alsehibany, R. A., & Abdelhalim, S. M. (2025) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2023.2249503 · Cited by 9
Metadata
- Authors
- Lee, H., Warschauer, M., & Lee, J. H.
- Venue
- Applied Linguistics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2018-03-26
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 721-753
- ISSN
- 0142-6001 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-450X
- OpenAlex
- W2791507392
- Cited by
- 256
- References
- 72
- FWCI
- 31.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Effects of Corpus Use on Second Language Vocabulary Learning: A Multilevel Meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/applin/amy012
- The paper
- Lee, H., Warschauer, M., & Lee, J. H. (2019). The Effects of Corpus Use on Second Language Vocabulary Learning: A Multilevel Meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy012
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
