Cited by 331Second Language Acquisition and LearningEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies

Predicting second language writing proficiency: the roles of cohesion and linguistic sophistication

Crossley, Scott A., McNamara, Danielle S.·2012·Journal of Research in Reading

Abstract

This study addresses research gaps in predicting second language (L2) writing proficiency using linguistic features. Key to this analysis is the inclusion of linguistic measures at the surface, textbase and situation model level that assess text cohesion and linguistic sophistication. The results of this study demonstrate that five variables (lexical diversity, word frequency, word meaningfulness, aspect repetition and word familiarity) can be used to significantly predict L2 writing proficiency. The results demonstrate that L2 writers categorised as highly proficient do not produce essays that are more cohesive, but instead produce texts that are more linguistically sophisticated. These findings have important implications for L2 writing development and L2 writing pedagogy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01449.x

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 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?

  • This study's results correspond to previous research findings that word formation is key in developing spelling, grammar, vocabulary, and lexical processing and writing, and EFL learners with lexical competence score holistically in writing composition.

    “This study's results also correspond to previous research findings, which support the argument that word formation is key in developing spelling, grammar, vocabulary, and lexical processing and writing, and EFL learners with lexical competence score holistically in writing composition (Masrai, 2016;Karimi, 2013;Crossley and McNamara, 2012;Crossley and McNamara, 2009;Engber, 1995).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S.
Affiliations
  • Georgia State University (US)
  • University of Memphis (US)
Corresponding author
Crossley, Scott A.
Venue
Journal of Research in Reading
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-08-31
Volume
35
Issue
2
Pages
115-135
ISSN
  • 0141-0423 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9817
OpenAlex
W2148785608
Cited by
331
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
7.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Research in Reading (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 › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
Keywords
second language writing, textual cohesion, lexical diversity, word frequency, word familiarity, situation model, textbase, L2 writing development, L2 writing pedagogy

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